some smug self righteous people on here.let he who is without sin..........

Great Ormond St worker sues hospital claiming
colleagues bullied her for being Christian , called her a ‘ silly white b***h’
Hospital staff told her not to drink after work as it would offend Muslims ,
kicked her in a lift , and subjected her to racial slurs and threatening behaviour

Nominated by the FA board in July 2016, Clarke assumed the role of chairman of the FA on 4 September 2016.[9] On 7 February 2019, Clarke was elected as a FIFA Vice President for the UEFA region at the 43rd UEFA Congress in Rome.[3][10]

While FA chairman, Clarke had to lead the organisation's response to allegations of historical sexual abuse in football, and of racism and bullying in relation to the Mark Sampson and Eniola Aluko cases.[11] In October 2017, Clarke announced a "fundamental" review of the FA after admitting it had "lost the trust of the public" following the Mark Sampson scandal.[12]

Public comments    Edit
In the same month, Clarke was criticised by sexual abuse victim Andy Woodward for 'humiliating' remarks Clarke made to a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee hearing,[13][14] while the Professional Footballers' Association's chief executive Gordon Taylor said the PFA might sue Clarke over suggestions Taylor had not supported Woodward with further counselling.[15]

On 10 November 2020, Clarke resigned with immediate effect as the Football Association chairman following a meeting with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, in which he referred to BAME footballers as "coloured people",[16] said a gay footballer’s decision on whether to come out was a "life choice", that "young female players did not like having the ball hit hard at them" and suggested that "different career interests" led South Asian people to choose careers in IT over sport.[17] Clarke was talking about the racist abuse of players by trolls to the DCMS select committee via video link when making these comments.[2]

Three years before, in front of the same parliamentary committee, Clarke said the issue of institutional racism in football was "fluff".[18] He had to apologise after being chastised by MPs and reminded that language matters and led to the FA being described as "shambolic" by a previous parliamentary enquiry.[19]

" said a gay footballer’s decision on whether to come out was a "life choice","   How terrible.. what is it then?

"different career interests" led South Asian people to choose careers in IT over sport" How many top south asian athletes are there compared to ones leading technological innovations in IT?

Was Clarke displaying the necessary qualities of leadership ?

a coach told him young female players didn't like having the ball hit hard at them, he didn't actually say it himself.

He didn't intend to offend using the word coloured. That word was used for years by people of his generation and was considered perfectly acceptable. At some point in the recent past it became unacceptable but without white people being made aware of it. What was the cut-off date? I can remember Rio Ferdinand giving out about the use of it on BT a few years ago but that's my entire knowledge on the subject.

Kick it Out once again saying they are 'disappointed' and looking down their nose at a guy who didn't intend to offend and doesn't have a clue about what is offensive and what isn't. They did the same to Bernardo and statements like that do nothing to further their cause. They seem more intent on vilifying people who make comments innocently and having them lose their jobs than actually tackling the racism problem and kicking it out.

It is an education issue. Black people get their education from experiencing racism first hand all their lives. Women understand sexism the same way. It hurts, it sticks with you and you remeber it. White men understand neither. It is like asking a 10yo boy who never went to school what 2+2 = and then saying 'shame on you' when he doesn't know the answer instead of telling him what 2 is and that the answer is 4.

They need to draw up a one page pamphlet listing what words are offensive and acceptable and what each racial stereotype is and why it is offensive. Send it to every house in the country. Really sick and tired of these mugs trying to solve a racism problem by requiring people who don't understand racism to figure it out like a cryptic crossword and lose their jobs if they don't. There are literally tens of millions of people in the UK who could do what Clarke or Bernardo did completely innocently and with no intention to offend. The only thing most white people understand about racism nowadays is not to mention anything to do with race but not why they shouldn't.

Absolute nonsense to try and argue he didn't know about these words no longer being acceptable. I am 10 years older than him and know only too well as do most other people of my generation.

I am always intrigued about the shootings, thousands of stabbings and gangs in London  and carrying knives-  none of the wokes seem to have any interest in this but happy to thrust one in this geezers back  - says it all for me  - none of the usual London politicos do not seem to have anything to say about it.

old habits die hard sparrow, get off your high horse.

His excuse doesn't make sense. He claimed that spending years "working" in the USA led to him getting accustomed to using the term "of colour" which is acceptable, citing this as the main reason why he used the term "coloured" which is not acceptable. If he had used the term "of colour" he would not have been made to resign. If he was familiar with the term "of colour", why didn't he use that term? Maybe he didn't mean to cause offence, but the fact that he used such an outdated term is indicative of the fact that he was in a job (no doubt a very lucrative one) for which he was poorly suited. The nub of it is that he is gravy trainer who has been getting way with it for years (there are many more, of course). He will walk away an even wealthier person than he already was, and should count his lucky stars to have had such a privileged position for so long without much scrutiny, even getting away with a similar gaffe 3 years ago. Also incidentally, in front of a Parliamentary committee, an occasion that should have engendered the highest levels of preparation and professionalism. To make such a gaffe (considering the importance and level of responsibility concomitant with his job, not to mention the over-inflated salary he received) in that context was incredibly stupid the first time, but to do it again is totally unacceptable.

give the guy a break ,when he used the term ""coloured ",it was in a sentence saying how bad it was about the abuse they sometimes suffer.
That has been forgotten,the woke brigade are far worse than anyone when it comes to intolerance ,they want anyone who doesnt use the correct terminology to pay a price for it ,or lose their job ,its not about education anymore ,they want blood.

It’s always interesting to read the comments of those who have clearly never held positions of responsibility.
Ignorance is bliss.

the usual are in overdrive on sky sports   ---  I mean  - have you ever seen women's footall.   The last ones I saw bar one was the women's chamionship quarter and semis  -  absolutely dreadful standard and yet they continue to 'big'  it up whilst lashing out at anything not woke.

he's probably right about schoolgirls not liking having the ball kicked at them hard. had it kicked hard at me a few times, right in the nuts.  fairly unpleasant.

minority worship must be enforced , we don’t live in a tolerant or secular society
It’s just s very dangerous form of intolerance

Any blaspheming will not be tolerated

Although I do watch the football

Farewell then, Greg Clarke. You were The One Who Said Stupid Stuff. Not to be confused with The One Who Also Said Stupid Stuff. Not to mention the one at the other place with the inappropriate text messages. Or the one who tried to change stuff but eventually gave up. Or the one who resigned in frustration. Not forgetting the one who had an embarrassing, but ultimately irrelevant, office affair.

You get the leaders you deserve, it is often said. Scanning the indecorous modern history of English football administration it is tempting to wonder what crime, what appalling feat of moral indecency, the national sport has committed to deserve this. The resignation of FA chairman Clarke on Tuesday evening was inevitable after his disastrous appearance before MPs that afternoon. This was a performance so ill-judged, so brain-manglingly stupid that words such as laughable or clown-like fail to do it justice.

To insult just one under-represented section of football’s parish with words better suited to a laughter-tracked 1970s sitcom could be considered careless. To insult another – The Gays: Just Playing Silly Buggers – in the same brief public appearance looks like compound idiocy. To insult a third – The Women: delicate flowers – at the same time looks like some kind of pathological condition or, at best, a piece of satirical performance art, Borat in a blazer.

Sadly, Clarke is not a clown. This is real. He is, or was, the chairman of the body that oversees England’s beloved, cherished, flawed, but vital game. In this role he was appointed, enabled and tolerated by everybody else who remains in the FA’s executive tier. If Clarke talks like this in front of politicians with cameras present, just imagine what he’s like in private.

It is still necessary to be very clear about these things. Does it matter if a man in his 60s uses the wrong words? For all the shared outrage on your timeline, there will be plenty who say this is not the problem it seems. They will argue using outdated language while trying to express broadly sympathetic and progressive ideas should not be a sacking offence.

The case for Clarke’s defence, then. When he referred to “coloured footballers” (to be clear: in the year 2020) he was, in fairness, trying to express sympathy with those who suffer structural barriers. When he previously described institutional racism and bullying allegations in the Eni Aluko case as “fluff” he was referring to the specific allegations in that case, not to the general concepts. This may be true. It is also irrelevant, as Clarke’s own resignation does at least acknowledge.

Words speak to deeper truths – and this is a note of progress to be absorbed, in particular by those above a certain age. Conquering racism, sexism or homophobia is not simply a matter of eradicating outright abuse, of ceasing to be the golf club sex pest, of retiring your Larry Grayson. Beyond the words is a reality of hard, ossified structures and an obligation among those in power to approach these with kindness, leadership and a will to go further, to raise the bar higher all the time.

This is doubly, triply the case for those in power in sport. Words like these from Clarke’s office have a structural significance; not micro-aggressions but macro-aggressions. For the head man at the FA not to get this is like the CEO of Apple not knowing how to turn on his Mac.

And so we come back to sport, to football, and to those old familiar questions. It is a constant source of bafflement that inequalities of opportunity and resources should still exist within English football, which has everything – finances, a captive audience – but which still seems to function so narrowly. Why are grassroots facilities so poorly provided when they should be exemplary? Why is women’s football, the football of half the populace, playing catch-up to such a degree? Why are there so few people of south Asian heritage in the sport? Why are black administrators and managers still so scarce? Why don’t these issues ever simply go away? Or in other words – the words of the newly departed FA chairman – why are coloured people and cowardly chicks so under-represented in my organisation? Beats me, old chap. Beats me.

This is the wider issue. In so much of UK sport the management tier does not represent either those it should serve or indeed the whole point of t he activity. It is worth noting Clarke’s qualifications for running English football, for taking on a role that is at bottom a matter of public service. Clarke is involved in private equity. Clarke worked for Lend Lease and Cable & Wireless. He served on the board of Bupa. A successful career in monetising goods and services: but this has little to do with the social goals of a not-for-profit body charged with nourishing the shared sporting health of the nation.

Until UK Sport stops putting semi-retired sales and business people in its most senior positions it will continue to fulfil only one aspect of its remit. These are not sales roles. They affect how we function, how we feel, and despite what the 1980s might have told us, the world is not simply made up of customers and shareholders.

Sport has been geared this way since the 1990s, when business people as managers seemed an attractive alternative to “the Blazers”, cobwebbed committee men with their own sinecures to protect. So we got a shot of ageing self-made Thatcherite energy. We got Giles Clarke instead of rhubarb and custard ties, Greg Clarke instead of Bert Millichip and submission to the idea those who have been forceful enough to join the executive class must be best qualified to run all things, that the skills set of a commodity trader is transferable to industries where the public good is involved.

By their resignation notes shall we know them. Clarke didn’t even get this right, producing an equivocal non-apology that suggested leaving the office he has seriously harmed with his comments was his own idea.

For now his departure may feel like progress, but until there is structural, and indeed philosophical change, in the notion of what successful leadership looks like, it is likely to be little more than a change of name on the door.

You have to be on the ball 24/7 , that seems like a lot of trouble
It’s not comfortable , and I must admit I like comfort