What's new

Was the appointment of Ryan Mason racist?

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
Perhaps not. But Chris Miller has a large forum and has been using it to make this accusation. So... it's out there.

Racism will always be out there, as someone who has suffered an unbelievable degree of racism in my life I find opportunistic topics like this tedious and boring mainly because much worse things like this has been happening way before it became popular to talk about it. Having said that whilst it's appreciated that people are starting to see how unbalanced and unfair the world is it doesn't help when people merely project their own thoughts on something which could easily be construed as a completely innocent appointment.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
May 5, 2005
21,636
45,304
The choice to appoint Mason ahead of Powell was stupid, short-sighted and was done purely to win over support from the fans/deflect criticism from Levy.

Levy made that choice because of purely cynical, rather than footballing reasons.

There was, however, absolutely nothing racist about it.
 

Dougal

Staff
Jun 4, 2004
60,383
130,350
I’m racist and so’s my wife.


It would appear Life of Brian quotes are not suitable for every occasion.

The thread is racist?

I honestly don’t know anymore. Just be kind to each other and don’t be a dick. We’ll go from there.
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
40,319
64,467
Maybe Powell is happy in his roles with us and England and didn't want the even temporary disruption taking the head coach job would require?

Mason 100% has ambitions to be a Premier League manager, probably in the not too distant future, so it might make sense to give him a feel of the hot seat advised by people who have experience but might not want the limelight any more. Maybe Levy thought Mason would bring a little extra out of his best mates in our squad in the short term, and bring back some goodwill with the fans having one of our own lead the team for two months.

It's all speculation in any case, but to suggest racism is involved without any evidence to support it is just pathetic Levy-smearing at it's worst.
 

tobi

Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose
Jun 10, 2003
17,625
11,840
If the decision is being made on optics/crowd pleasing (rather than coaching experience) then surely the victim of "structural racism" here would be Ledley King not Chris Powell who never played for us? Ledley fits both bills.

But WIndy was specific about it being Chris Powell. Made me scratch my head.

What coaching experience does King have?
 

MassadaTom

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
1,392
1,636
Whether true or not, it's disturbing how many people here want to shut down the debate about this.

I guess our fanbase is no different to others'.
The problem is that there is nothing to debate about.
We know that Mason was appointed , and we now that Powell was not .
We dont know why. Its pointless to talk about it without some ITK. Definitely not fun in current climate
 

wrd

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2014
13,603
58,005
I think if you analyse Mason's situation. He was already coaching one of our teams, we are developing him as a coach and Hitchen I imagine would have been aware of the technical attributes that Mason would be bringing and how he has been developing.

So it looks to me we made a logical decision on taking this opportunity of having a temporary managerial position open to further develop Mason by giving him some experience in some pretty rare circumstances. That should hopefully stand us in good stead in the long term as its clear we are hoping to develop him to be a managerial candidate one day.

Now can you say the same about Powell? Is there as much to gain in making him caretaker manager over Mason? Would we benefit from him getting this temporary experience, I think the logical answer is no, Powell wasn't even apart of the fold and has 10 years of managerial experience which will far outweigh a few weeks managing Spurs but is huge in terms of progressing Mason.

So when you analyse the situation and the reasons why, I think you can quite easily come to the conclusion that it wasn't a situation based on racism or even unconcious bias because there are plenty of valid reasons for the decisions we made.

If there wasn't the massive upside as to why it benefits the club in giving Mason the experience then maybe we can talk about unconcious bias but there is so I think we can put it to bed.
 
Last edited:

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
Also positive discrimination is a thing, majority white companies hire non white's or people with a disability to be the token or to fill a quota or to tick a box only which if you can prove it is just as offensive.

It's such a nuanced debate, don't think I'm in the mood for this :D
 

MassadaTom

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
1,392
1,636
I think if you analyse Mason's situation. He was already coaching one of our teams, we are developing him as a coach and Hitchen I imagine would have been aware of the technical attributes that Mason would be bringing and how he has been developing.

So it looks to me we made a logical decision on taking this opportunity of having a temporary managerial position open to further develop Mason by giving him some experience in some pretty rare circumstances. That should hopefully stand us in good stead in the long term as its clear we are hoping to develop him to be a managerial candidate one day.

Now can you say the same about Powell? Is there as much to gain in making him caretaker manager over Mason? Would we benefit from him getting this temporary experience, I think the logical answer is no, Powell wasn't even apart of the fold and has 10 years of managerial experience which will far outweigh a few weeks managing Spurs but is huge in terms of progressing Mason.

So when you analyse the situation and the reasons why, I think you can quite easily come to the conclusion that it wasn't a situation based on racism or even unconcious bias because there are plenty of valis reasons for the decisions we made.

If there wasn't the massive upside as to why it benefits the club in giving Mason the experience then maybe we can talk about unconcious bias but there is so I think we can put it to bed.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
34,495
84,260
1621426229511.png
 

curlacious

Don’t look at me. I’m irrelevant.
Aug 29, 2017
2,131
10,123
I think it’s a valid, interesting question to raise; whether it’s true or not is another debate.

But I think we’re thoughtful enough to have that conversation?

Maybe not.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
34,495
84,260
I think it’s a valid, interesting question to raise; whether it’s true or not is another debate.

But I think we’re thoughtful enough to have that conversation?

Maybe not.
Not really. It's very hard to judge an individual case on such a weak basis.
 

allatsea

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
8,996
16,277
Fucking wet wipe.

If Chris Powell were to tell us that he had been overlooked, then maybe there could be something in it. However, he hasn't and neither you nor I nor Windy Miller know what conversations were had as to whether CP wanted it, or was needed to continue in his current (important) role for stability or whatever else.

There could be unconscious bias at play as King of Otters suggests, but there's no way Windy has the information or is close enough to the reasons behind the decision or the selection process to make that call.

How do we know that Powell wasn’t offered the job and said no thanks ? I am sure I read somewhere on SC that he didn’t want to be a No. 1 and was happier at No 2 or 3.

The choice to appoint Mason ahead of Powell was stupid, short-sighted and was done purely to win over support from the fans/deflect criticism from Levy.

Levy made that choice because of purely cynical, rather than footballing reasons.

There was, however, absolutely nothing racist about it.

I didn’t realise you are ITK and were aware what went on with this temporary appointment.
 
Top