DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 108215--------------------------------------------------
Re: DEI
DIR By: bmb
Date: July 2, 2026, 2:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Blind Referee link ---
>
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=8173.msg108109#msg108109
date=1782814642]Was Farai Hallam tearing up the Premier League
last season simply a EDI tick box exercise or because he's an
outstanding referee?
--- End Quote ---
Or did Farai get his chance because of his colour ? Remember the
“experiments” with Sam Allison and the fella Singh ( can’t
remember his first name ) - very clear now that they were pushed
and given their chance because of their colour - both have
dropped off the radar simply because they weren’t good enough -
how many none DEI could have ‘teared up the Prem League” if they
had been given an equal chance and opportunity?
EDIT: Just fixed up the quote for you.
[/quote]
I have no doubt that BAMREF and the Core X programme played a
very small part by opening up a pathway that wasn't there for
him before because of the colour of his skin (there are stats
out there) and he was given the level footing he should have
been given anyway, the same level footing that every single
referee should be given, whatever their colour, race, sex,
sexuality etc. EDI/DEI applies to everyone - Equality Diversity
Inclusion is also for white male referees who perhaps wouldn't
otherwise get the chance or be on the same level footing because
they come from a poor background, tesco value football boots and
a 20 year out of date football kit 3 sizes too big for them
because it's all they could afford on ebay or marketplace or
wherever, also face discrimination or they're not an RDO or
besties with the RDO or whatever other criteria has historically
held them back unfairly. Every form of discrimination is wrong.
I would love for the day to come where referees are simply
marked on their ability, talent and performance as that should
be the only true factors but all the while discrimination still
exists, whatever the grounds for that discrimination are, there
has to be something there to fight against it so that ALL
referees have the same level playing field. Does that end up
also creating a different form of discrimination - possibly in
some cases or if it is just used as a tick box exercise instead
of being used to actively root out those who are guilty of
discriminatory behaviour and replacing them with fair minded
people. I doubt it will ever happen in my lifetime, it hasn't
done so yet but at least there are efforts to right that wrong.
Not sure which Gill you mean - Sunny or Bhups. One of them was
out injured for a long while last season (can't remember which)
so it wasn't a case of him disappearing, he wasn't being
selected because he was injured.
#Post#: 108232--------------------------------------------------
Re: DEI
DIR By: DublinRef
Date: July 2, 2026, 10:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You make a very good point ajb95, and I think, as a result, I
should clarify what I’m trying to say.
When I say there are two steps to DEI, I think that is broadly
true. The first is, as bmb has pointed out, ensuring that the
pathway to high-level position - in this case, refereeing - is
just as open to underrepresented groups as it is to groups that
have traditionally been well represented. I don’t think anyone
can rationally disagree with that objective. It is clearly in
the interests of both fairness and raising standards overall.
However, I also think that many DEI policies - although I can’t
speak specifically for FIFA or the Premier League, as I’m not
familiar with their internal policies - include a second
consideration that is broader than individual merit alone.
To illustrate what I mean, imagine a purely hypothetical
example. (I appreciate this is not how referee selection
actually works, but it helps explain the principle.)
Suppose there are 10 Premier League refereeing positions
available. One hundred referees sit a theoretical examination,
and anyone who scores above 80% is considered qualified for
selection. Assume further that access to training, preparation,
and the examination itself has been completely fair and equally
available to everyone, regardless of background.
If everyone who scores above 80% happens to come from groups
that have traditionally been well represented - for example,
white men - I don’t think many people would argue that
candidates who failed to meet the minimum qualifying standard
should nevertheless be selected because of their race, sex, or
any other protected characteristic. Assuming the process leading
up to the examination was genuinely fair, failing to meet the
qualification threshold means you cannot reasonably expect
selection.
Now imagine a different scenario. This time, the group of
candidates who score above 80% is diverse. The ten highest marks
are all achieved by white men, but there are also many
candidates from underrepresented groups who comfortably exceed
the 80% threshold and are therefore fully qualified.
It seems to me that many DEI programmes would not necessarily
say, “Simply select the ten highest scores.” Instead, they may
argue that, once a pool of qualified candidates has been
established, diversity can legitimately be considered alongside
merit, even if that means selecting someone who scored slightly
lower than another qualified candidate in order to achieve
broader representation.
That, I think, is where the controversy lies. I’ve seen similar
situations in workplaces and other settings where people have
been upset because they believed they had performed better on
the relevant assessment yet were passed over in favour of
another qualified candidate under DEI considerations.
I think it’s perfectly rational to argue that this is unfair
from the perspective of the individual. Equally, I can
understand the opposing argument: that, once everyone being
considered is demonstrably qualified, there is a legitimate
societal benefit in promoting diversity within that qualified
group.
In a profession like elite refereeing, where there are
relatively few positions available, balancing those competing
principles becomes particularly difficult. My point wasn’t to
say that one side is obviously right or wrong, but rather that
this broader societal objective of representation and diversity
is, in many cases, an important part of what DEI policies are
trying to achieve, in addition to ensuring equal access to
opportunities in the first place.
#Post#: 108251--------------------------------------------------
Re: DEI
DIR By: Original82
Date: July 2, 2026, 4:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If we take the Tori Penso inclusion and we ask the question of
"why?" then that leads me down the following path.
If it because these are the best referees in the World
irrespective of gender, then WWW27 in Brazil should surely have
a largely significant proportion of male referees.
(And, yes, we can apply the same logic to previous editions of
all competitions.)
If it's because of their performances in international men's
football over a number of seasons, then I can't see an awful lot
of games refereed by Penso that would qualify for that, bar CWC
fixtures.
#Post#: 109256--------------------------------------------------
Re: DEI
DIR By: EXEFLAR
Date: July 16, 2026, 2:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I’m so thrilled that this has created a debate…which was my
absolute point.
My point when I first posted this was to say something that
perhaps posters knew but were afraid to ask.
I decided my first post would be perhaps slightly different…not
for the sake…but perhaps to open an issue which after 22 years
of professional football has become a topic that has become an
angry and divisive point.
I actually thought admin would shut me off…thank you for not…so
my point remains…and I know by many replies that there is a deep
feeling for what I meant…but my ultimate point was…when I first
joined the FL in 2001…I had to be the best of the best to get
past level three…I then had to have an interview…so…getiiing to
the FL line wow me was truly a 10 year battle of being the best
I can…the person above me that year was Marc Perry…I’ll say no
more.
So what is my point…well ..20 years ago…we were promoted on
absolute talent and dedication…and I am very sorry that that
looked a different world…but girls were involved ..and
minorities were involved…but never promoted…then WOKE
arrrived…and I had to watch some of the best officials ever not
progress due to other things…bear in mind I had games with
Michael Oliver so I knew what top class meant.
I have had games involving black,female,Asian officials which
have been absolutely fantastic…it was clear on some of these
occasions that there is exceptional talent…however…overall…from
vast experience…I have felt nothing but people pushed into holes
too early causing chaos…I have many examples…in fact one where a
very experienced FL ref decided that night that he was going to
call it a day….lovely lad…black fourth official…who had never
done a FL game before and was at Bradford in front of 26000
fans…he was overwhelmed…I spoke to him in car park and he said
his biggest game before was altrincham with 700 people
So why was he there???
FYI…this fourth official didn’t even know he needed two watches.
And had never handled a FL sub board
Thank you to all who replied to my first very nervous
post…special thanks to Dublin ref who saw through my nerves to
the point of great debate.
I have spent 15 years viewing this website because we are not
allowed to comment…which is fine…however…I have been involved in
many games on this website…and generally…you judged a lot of
things very accurately…of course differences..which is
brilliant….and I know many of you know top level
officials…however…this is probably my big niggle as you have
worked out…
I now look forward to giving you all a view from very recent
officiating…although I am always impressed that one of you is a
step ahead.
Thanks again.
I’ll close off this chapter.
Hopefully next season I will be able to add some audio to your
thoughts.
#Post#: 109264--------------------------------------------------
Re: DEI
DIR By: aaa
Date: July 16, 2026, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
EXEFLAR, no one is going to shut you down. While your
experience is unquestionable and your opinion on DEI/EDI would
be shared by many on here, one thing you did not mention in any
of your post is the amount of non-DEI/EDI that were pushed at
the same time.
If you don't mind, it would be good if you could provide a
statistical data on demographic distribution of all the
officials that were being pushed in the last 10 years or so.
I'm now thinking, maybe your gripe is not about officials that
were being pushed, but ones' that that does not look like you.
Just a thought!
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page