THE Bury Times drew attention (Nov 19) to the fact that there are very few Asian players in big-time football.

This is perceived by certain people as being a "problem", the implication being that the proportion of Asian footballers ought to equal the proportion of Asians in the UK population, after allowing for age variations. The BBC, predictably, has even produced a TV programme on the subject.

But why should ethnic variations in any socio-economic outcome be seen as evidence that something has gone wrong? Since when, in our immensely complex society, should we equate equality of opportunity with equality of outcome?

Variations in such a society are not the exception; they are the rule. The blindingly obvious fact is that different groups have a pronounced tendency to specialise in different areas and this means that we have a characteristic and perfectly proper pattern of unequal outcomes. This in no way indicates so-called racism. The simple fact is that different groups choose to take advantage of certain opportunities, and reject others.

For instance, home-ownership is highly valued by Asians, so a higher proportion of Asian families own their own home than any other group. Should we encourage them to give up their homes so as to equalise the outcome?

A disproportionate number of professional people are being produced by the British Chinese community; should we have anti-Chinese quotas to reduce the proportion of Chinese professionals? The most successful children in our schools happen to be of Indian origin; should we encourage Indian parents to seek to prevent their children's success?

The truth is that the pernicious and irresponsible anti-racist lobby has sought - with considerable success - to implant in the minds of a high proportion of the public and those in authority that, unless there are equal outcomes according to race, then this is evidence of racial discrimination.

This dangerous falsehood ought to be challenged every time it is produced. We should never allow those with an axe to grind to generate resentment, for it is such resentment that creates the very hostility the anti-racists constantly complain about.

As for Asian footballers there are two points to bear in mind. Asian parents with promising children do not allow their offspring to enter the football profession because they prefer them to become doctors and lawyers, which they perceive as being of higher status.

Secondly, how do the anti-racists explain the massive "over representation" of black players? Using their logic, this is clear evidence of discrimination against white players. But does anyone with sense actually believe this? Of course not. Black players have earned their success and selection on merit. And I say good luck to them.

As a keen season ticket holder at Gigg Lane, I particularly resent any suggestion of discrimination at the club. In fact Bury FC is noted for the very high number of black players it fields - and we now have an Indian player who is cheered to the echo every time he appears.

It is time the outrageous anti-racist zealots stopped attacking an entirely honourable sport which, in terms of player-selection, has an impeccable record.

RAY HONEYFORD,

Wragby Close, Bury.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.