UK Edition
FA chairman Greg Clarke tells MPs about 'coloured' footballers and describes being gay as 'life choice'
Series of disturbing gaffes at select committee hearing puts Clarke's job in danger
Greg Clarke's future as chairman of the Football Association is in serious doubt amid a backlash over remarks he made about race, sexuality and the women's game during a car-crash appearance before MPs.
The 62-year-old was immediately forced to apologise after referring to "coloured" footballers while pontificating about the Government's failure to stop racist trolls. However, anti-discrimination campaigners and cross-party MPs were equally offended by comments he also made about the Asian community, schoolgirl footballers and the suggestion that being gay is a "life choice".
One shocked figure on the FA Council suggested afterwards that Clarke may now be on borrowed time as patience was already wearing thin at the governing body over his recent involvement in Project Big Picture.
Clarke made a series of disastrous comments before the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport select committee just moments after insisting to a hearing that "my standing in the game is absolutely fine". He had denied a suggestion from committee chair Julian Knight that his "authority is shot" following Telegraph revelations about his involvement in PBP.
Anti-discrimination campaigners were then outraged as Clarke repeatedly stuck his foot in it while calling for ministers to employ tougher curbs to tackle abuse of players online. During the hearing, Clarke went on to call for more protection for footballers on social media before using the term "coloured", an outdated phrase which is now regarded as an offensive racial slur.
"If I look at what happens to high-profile female footballers, high-profile coloured footballers and the abuse they take on social media... social media is a free for all, and people can see if you're black, and if they don't like black people because they're filthy racists, they will abuse you anonymously online," Clarke had told the committee.
When the committee later pulled him up on his use of the language, Clarke responded by saying, "if you please allow me to respond: one, if I said it, I deeply apologise for it. Secondly, I am a product of having worked overseas. I worked in the USA for many years, where I was required to use the term people of colour and sometimes because that was the product for their diversity legislation positive discrimination format. Sometimes I trip over my words."
The FA later repeated his apology in a statement. "Greg Clarke is deeply apologetic for the language he used to reference members of the ethnic minority community during the select committee hearing today," a statement said. "He acknowledged that using the term ‘coloured’ is not appropriate and wholeheartedly apologised during the hearing."
Clarke was already treading a narrow line after claiming the dearth of Asian footballers compared to "Afro-Caribbean communities" was because they have different career interests. "If you look at top-level football, the Afro-Caribbean communities are over represented versus the South Asian community," he told MPs. "If you go to the IT department at the FA, there's a lot more South Asians than there are Afro-Caribbeans - they have different career interests. So what we have to do is treat each individual on their merits, but make sure we are inclusive with measure programmes which don't cross the line."
The FootballvHomophobia campaign group also expressed anger at "deeply offensive" comments Clarke made when discussing why no current English players in the elite game had come out as gay. "What I would want to do is to know that anybody who runs out onto the pitch and says on Monday, 'I'm gay and I'm proud of it and I'm happy and it's a life choice'... they would have the support of their mates in the changing room," he said.
Leading figures in the women's game and Kick It Out were also shocked by Clarke's suggestion that schoolgirls do not like the ball being kicked hard at them, "You talk to the leaders of the women's football game," Clarke had said. "You have to sit down and understand how the women's game is different. And I talked to a coach... She said, 'what's the issue with goalkeepers in the women's game?' And she said, 'young girls when they take up the game, 6-7-8, just don't like having the ball kicked at them hard, right. So, they prefer to kick it rather than having it kicked at them. So, you know, we have to understand that we have to look at different ways..."
Jane Purdon, chief executive of Women in Football, tweeted in response: "In my playing days, I had a high tolerance of footballs being kicked hard at me. If you're a girl and you feel the same, you're in the right place."
Responding to Clarke's evidence, Piara Powar, the executive director of European football’s anti-discrimination organisation Fare, said: "I like Greg Clarke, I think he’s quite genuine, but why does he talk such b******s? This stuff about ‘coloured’ players and Asians in the IT department. It’s inaccurate and insulting."
Sanjay Bhandari, executive chair at Kick It Out, said in a statement that he was "extremely disappointed" by Clarke's "outdated language" which "should remain consigned to the dustbin of history".
"I was particularly concerned by the use of lazy racist stereotypes about South Asians and their supposed career preferences," he added.
"The casual sexism of saying ‘girls’ do not like balls hit at them hard, is staggering from anyone, let alone the leader of our national game," he added. "It is completely unacceptable."
Alex Davies-Jones MP, who recently presented a speech in Parliament raising concerns about sexism in sport, said Clarke's language was "absolutely abhorrent".
"It speaks volumes about the urgent progress that needs to be made in terms of leadership on equalities issues in sport," she tweeted. "I can't believe we're still here in 2020."
MPs and lawyers both suggested the FA should be launching an inquiry over Clarke's comments. Sports lawyer David Seligman questioned whether there would be a misconduct charge, while Dino Nocivelli, a lawyer representing victims of racial abuse at Chelsea in the 1980s, said one of his clients was calling for him to resign.
The FA's own conduct rules state a how "a participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour”.
Alison McGovern, the shadow minister, said she had her "head in my hands" over the hearing. Marsha de Cordova, the shadow women and equalities secretary, added: "The FA must do much more than simply apologise – they should review all of their diversity programmes and ask whether they go far enough or fast enough."
Former FA chairman David Bernstein, meanwhile, told The Daily Telegraph that Clarke's appearance had made the governing body look out of touch. "Today's events really do support the thesis that the Football Association is just not up-to-date," said Bernstein, whose 'Saving the Beautiful Game' campaign is leading calls for an independent regulator. "It's not in touch and what has happened is symptomatic of the need for urgent change both at the Football Association and within the wider game. "Frankly, there couldn't be a stronger case for our arguments than what's happened today."
Clarke had been called before MPs - along with Rick Parry, of the EFL, and the Premier League's Richard Masters - following Telegraph Sport's bombshell revelations on Oct 11 of a secret plot to revolutionise the game. The Telegraph subsequently disclosed how Clarke had input on all 18 drafts of Project Big Picture despite later claiming he had backed off early from the plot.
Clarke, who helped torpedo the proposals with a critical letter after they were first disclosed by Telegraph three weeks ago, insisted on Tuesday that he was fiercely opposed to B-teams even though a document leaked to this newspaper suggested he had first floated them. Clarke suggested he always had concerns about how the project would be received by the 14 smaller Premier League clubs as the prospect of stronger voting rights for the big six were raised.
Mr Knight, however, asked him "how did it take 18 meetings to realise it was a power grab?" Clarke said he would not characterise PBP proposals as a power grab. When asked why he hadn't walked away earlier, he added: “I have observed and participated in negotiations over many years and I don’t give up on them easily. I believed it was worth hanging on in there to see if a deal could be done.
“By the time we got to the middle of May it was apparent there wasn’t a deal to be done.
“In the middle of May the discussion was how on earth we would sell a proposition to Premier League clubs where the majority of clubs would be losers.”
Despite the email evidence published in Telegraph Sport which indicated he floated B-teams and a Premier League 2 as part of pyramid reforms, Clarke said he personally thought the introduction of B-teams to the football pyramid was a “terrible idea”. He defended the fact that the strategic review was centred on Premier League clubs.
“I don’t think that’s a bad thing,” he said. “Unless the Premier League sign up to a solution, there is no solution.” After PBP was rejected by the league last month, the Premier League announced it was carrying out a own strategic review and Masters said “change is coming”.
“We were also contemplating our own strategic review, then the pandemic came and changed everything,” Masters said. He said the proposals would be outlined by March.