Jump to content
IGNORED

The Coronavirus and its impact on sport/Fans Return (Merged)


Loderingo

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, HiddenGem7 said:

It will take months to do human trials and you cant fast track the process in case there are unforeseen side effects. Especially if the plan is to roll it out to millions of people in a short space of time.

There's two other key stages:

Regulatory approval: manufacturers will prioritise the largest markets first, so the EU will be high the list. We've just left the EMA (the EU regulatory body). So accepting their regulation would mean accepting new EU regulation. You'd have thought common sense might prevail in this instance, but the Brexit zealots now in charge have only just confirmed our exit from the EU pandemic early warning system in the name of a 'clean break'. So, the chances are we'll be some way down the list in terms of regulatory approval.

Manufacture: the UK has no vaccine manufacturing capacity. So we will be dependent on other countries, and on the various trading blocs etc tp which they belong. Again, we'll be some way down the list of priorities.

Never mind, we still won 2 world wars so we can go it alone in the world...

Edited by italian dave
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

That's what Sky News have reported this morning. Would wipe out next season as well, as a spectator event. 

Crikey. Lots of clubs will go out of business for sure.

Edited by Super
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Unfair and wrong to abandon the season, as I said yesterday. HOWEVER, if the government are seriously considering placing a ban on all gatherings of over 500 people for up to two years then it's difficult to see any other outcome. 

I just can’t see a way this season can be finished with any integrity.  It’s likely teams will be at different stages of fitness/illness so even playing behind closed doors has massive integrity problems.  Abandoning the season is extremely probable as this virus kicks on so working out what happens next to be fair for those at the top and those at the bottom is going to be intriguing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the season were abandoned then the only fair way would be to call the standings as final and do the playoffs closed-doors, or award third place promotion. The only people seriously calling for annulment of the current term are the "Stick-It-To-Liverpool" crowd and Karren Brady. Neither of which warrant justification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, General Zod said:

I just can’t see a way this season can be finished with any integrity.  It’s likely teams will be at different stages of fitness/illness so even playing behind closed doors has massive integrity problems.  Abandoning the season is extremely probable as this virus kicks on so working out what happens next to be fair for those at the top and those at the bottom is going to be intriguing.

I don't disagree with you but since when has football been driven by integrity? My cynical side thinks that there's so much money in football that they will find a way to justify to themselves as close to BAU as possible. 

Greedy agents want their deals. Clubs are owned by businessmen. BT and Sky need a product. Advertising has to reach its market. Etc etc

Money is king.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Surely that's a typo. 2 months?

If we've gone from a 'carry on and self isolate' to a 2 year ban on all large sporting events, concerts and conferences etc that's a rather large escalation in a few days. 

It does say 2 years on the sky news article.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-mass-gatherings-to-be-banned-under-government-plans-to-combat-covid-19-spread-11957350

Edited by Super
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Super said:

It does say 2 years on the sky news article.

Yeah I read it....still think, "hope", it's a typo. 

It's not being reported as 2 years on any other articles i've read - if it was true I think more people would be picking up on and talking about it! 

That's a very long time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Yeah I read it....still think, "hope", it's a typo. 

It's not being reported as 2 years on any other articles i've read - if it was true I think more people would be picking up on and talking about it! 

That's a very long time!

I don’t think anyone expects this to even go on for two years (from now) 

 

(probably because it will come to a peak in a far shorter period than that)

Edited by Bouncearoundtheground
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

That's what Sky News have reported this morning. Would wipe out next season as well, as a spectator event. 

That would be astonishing. One week make a conscious decision, stressing that it's based on science and evidence, that will allow 60,000 people to gather together for days. The next week ban all gatherings over 500 for two years. That's not a U turn, that's a triple flip double whammy, or whatever the gymnastic phrase is, of Olympic proportions.

I'll look forward to hearing what those scientific advisers, who stand alongside him, have to say when Boris announces that.

  • Like 3
  • Robin 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, mozo said:

I don't disagree with you but since when has football been driven by integrity? My cynical side thinks that there's so much money in football that they will find a way to justify to themselves as close to BAU as possible. 

Greedy agents want their deals. Clubs are owned by businessmen. BT and Sky need a product. Advertising has to reach its market. Etc etc

Money is king.

Sadly you probably have a point.  But games going ahead with half the squad in isolation or even without managers and coaches just to say we finished the season would be a very strange. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgetting contract ends of 30.06 and the virus going on for ages and ages (tbc), there are many ways the season can still be completed, even going into next season’s dates.  You could cancel all the cup competitions, cancel the International stuff, delay Euro2020 til next summer etc, etc.

It will require some adjustments etc, but it is possible. 

Whether there is appetite or not I don’t know.

They’ve suspended the leagues to allow a period of monitoring.  We can speculate all we like (and we will - it’s a forum), but to knee-jerk either extremes of:

- void the season

- finish it in current positions 

is a bit pointless at this point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, General Zod said:

Sadly you probably have a point.  But games going ahead with half the squad in isolation or even without managers and coaches just to say we finished the season would be a very strange. 

And that's what I personally expect to happen (pure cynical speculation).

It keeps the money flowing, albeit to a lesser extent. 

I suppose it gets controversial if say Aston Villa have a crucial game in their survival bid and Grealish wakes up on Saturday feeling under the weather. Does he play or do they do the right thing? 

Contracts and transfers is an odd one too. If the league continued into July, could West Ham spend a load of money of new players to secure survival, or would the FA insist that new recruits can't play until the next season? 

Could City use expensive loans to give us the edge over Preston?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mozo said:

And that's what I personally expect to happen (pure cynical speculation).

It keeps the money flowing, albeit to a lesser extent. 

I suppose it gets controversial if say Aston Villa have a crucial game in their survival bid and Grealish wakes up on Saturday feeling under the weather. Does he play or do they do the right thing? 

Contracts and transfers is an odd one too. If the league continued into July, could West Ham spend a load of money of new players to secure survival, or would the FA insist that new recruits can't play until the next season? 

Could City use expensive loans to give us the edge over Preston?

I think it would be pretty logical that the transfer window wouldn’t open until the end of the season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alessandro said:

Yeah I read it....still think, "hope", it's a typo. 

It's not being reported as 2 years on any other articles i've read - if it was true I think more people would be picking up on and talking about it! 

That's a very long time!

The legislation would last for 2 years (they have to put some time limit on it) - it doesn't mean that it won't be repealed when the crisis is over.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the bigger picture, there needs to be some help given to non league clubs from Sky/Premier league etc. I know of clubs that have already gone 6 weeks without a home game because of the weather. That’s a long time to have no income, do players still get paid? Club staff? Easy to say no but even at that level footballers are paid a not insignificant amount of money and could need that to get by - especially as you tend to get a lot of self employed / tradies at that level so that’s a double hit.

incidentally this is obviously outdated but for example Bradford towns schedule before the cancellation announcement

17 games in 40 days. No one can be expected to perform (and avoid injury) almost every other day for over a month. Add to that family and work commitments

285334FC-EADA-4A3B-A606-281E8F00AA8D.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Looking at the bigger picture, there needs to be some help given to non league clubs from Sky/Premier league etc. I know of clubs that have already gone 6 weeks without a home game because of the weather. That’s a long time to have no income, do players still get paid? Club staff? Easy to say no but even at that level footballers are paid a not insignificant amount of money and could need that to get by - especially as you tend to get a lot of self employed / tradies at that level so that’s a double hit.

incidentally this is obviously outdated but for example Bradford towns schedule before the cancellation announcement

17 games in 40 days. No one can be expected to perform (and avoid injury) almost every other day for over a month. Add to that family and work commitments

285334FC-EADA-4A3B-A606-281E8F00AA8D.jpeg

Not saying i dont agree but why would SKY care about non league teams?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Super said:

Not saying i dont agree but why would SKY care about non league teams?

I was thinking more about the money. You’re right they probably wouldn’t, I think what I was suggesting is some money should filter down so save the smaller clubs. I said Sky but meant all broadcasters, BT cover some non league football so do have an element of interest

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I was thinking more about the money. You’re right they probably wouldn’t, I think what I was suggesting is some money should filter down so save the smaller clubs. I said Sky but meant all broadcasters, BT cover some non league football so do have an element of interest

That is like saying Microsoft should help independent IT Contractors.

It isn't their problem.

Might be a nice gesture, but I don't see it happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one of the things that has to be considered in whether or when the season restarts is the overall Government strategy.

The chief scientific officer has stated that we’re looking for “Herd Immunity”, which relies on a large proportion of the population gaining immunity from either

a) Vaccinations; or

b) Gained Immunity through exposure

Now, as noted, a vaccine is progressing but won’t come for some time - so they’re going for b). It’s risky as it isn’t known if exposure gives some/all sufferers ultimate immunity, but that’s what the game is.

Linking that to banning mass gatherings.

Football has stopped not because of the risk of contagion (see above - the strategy relies on contagion, it’s just not wanted too fast at present so the NHS has more resources due to other seasonal illnesses not occurring), it’s stopped because teams are now reporting cases which means whole squads are unavailable (evidence: Prem on as at Thursday 9pm, only called off when Arteta/Hudson-Odoi ill). The Chief Medical and Scientific officers also believe that banning mass gatherings have no effect, so the U Turn is Boris trying to look like he’s in charge when football made the decision for him.

Back to the strategy.

Because we failed to take early preventative steps, COVID is here and likely in far wider numbers than reported (CSO). Working on the basis of current estimate of one person infecting three others, this now cannot be controlled fully - by the time symptoms emerge, you’ve already infected others reducing the benefits of isolation.

Add in that the CMO has already told the most vulnerable they may have to self isolate even if no symptoms (which can only be because it’s so widespread that if they didn’t they’d be statistically likely to pick it up), and the overall plan, to me, suggests we’re heading for this:

- A return to effective ‘BAU’ for the majority of the population sometime in April/May. This will be predicated on the virus now being unable to be contained but will be driven in large part by economic factors

- With that, a removal of the need to self isolate if you’ve had contact. Means only those with covid have to isolate and squads not affected.

- An ability to run mass gatherings again (on the basis that there is no point suspending if you can’t contain the virus anyway) BUT with the specific exclusion of the most vulnerable, who will remain in self isolation in line with guidance.

Shorter version - the plan appears to be for most of us to get it in a managed way, and once you’re over the winter months, under that strategy mass gatherings are almost desirable.

Not saying it’s right - but that is certainly what the “Herd Immunity” plan suggests would happen if you balanced it with economic requirements

Edited by Silvio Dante
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This (below) was the bit from the Times that the Sky article above mentioned. Yes banning events is also mentioned but I don’t think it necessarily means all events over 500 people will be banned for two years. However, given the experts were saying the peak of the virus here is expected to be end May to mid June, if the season is to be completed, I can only see that taking place Aug-Oct when the previous season would usually have started. Have a break/transfer window after that. You then finish next season later - or shorten like others have said by only playing each team once or splitting the Divisions into North and South regions with play offs afterwards. 

”Police will be able to detain infected people and schools could be forced to stay open under a package of powers being announced next week to tackle the coronavirus pandemic. 
Emergency laws to help to limit the spread of the virus will be introduced after the number of people infected in Britain rose by 200 in 24 hours to 798. The measures, seen by
The Times, will also let councils lower standards in care homes to deal with staff shortages. The legislation, which ministers intend to push through parliament in two weeks, will equip the government to deal with the disease. Ministers believe that the virus will infect the majority of the population, and the laws will stay in place for two years.“

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think one of the things that has to be considered in whether or when the season restarts is the overall Government strategy.

The chief scientific officer has stated that we’re looking for “Herd Immunity”, which relies on a large proportion of the population gaining immunity from either

a) Vaccinations; or

b) Gained Immunity through exposure

Now, as noted, a vaccine is progressing but won’t come for some time - so they’re going for b). It’s risky as it isn’t known if exposure gives some/all sufferers ultimate immunity, but that’s what the game is.

Linking that to banning mass gatherings.

Football has stopped not because of the risk of contagion (see above - the strategy relies on contagion, it’s just not wanted too fast at present so the NHS has more resources due to other seasonal illnesses not occurring), it’s stopped because teams are now reporting cases which means whole squads are unavailable (evidence: Prem on as at Thursday 9pm, only called off when Arteta/Hudson-Odoi ill). The Chief Medical and Scientific officers also believe that banning mass gatherings have no effect, so the U Turn is Boris trying to look like he’s in charge when football made the decision for him.

Back to the strategy.

Because we failed to take early preventative steps, COVID is here and likely in far wider numbers than reported (CSO). Working on the basis of current estimate of one person infecting three others, this now cannot be controlled fully - by the time symptoms emerge, you’ve already infected others reducing the benefits of isolation.

Add in that the CMO has already told the most vulnerable they may have to self isolate even if no symptoms (which can only be because it’s so widespread that if they didn’t they’d be statistically likely to pick it up), and the overall plan, to me, suggests we’re heading for this:

- A return to effective ‘BAU’ for the majority of the population sometime in April/May. This will be predicated on the virus now being unable to be contained but will be driven in large part by economic factors

- With that, a removal of the need to self isolate if you’ve had contact. Means only those with covid have to isolate and squads not affected.

- An ability to run mass gatherings again (on the basis that there is no point suspending if you can’t contain the virus anyway) BUT with the specific exclusion of the most vulnerable, who will remain in self isolation in line with guidance.

Shorter version - the plan appears to be for most of us to get it in a managed way, and once you’re over the winter months, under that strategy mass gatherings are almost desirable.

Not saying it’s right - but that is certainly what the “Herd Immunity” plan suggests would happen if you balanced it with economic requirements

I don't think Boris's ban is about players reporting cases and squads being unavailable. It's explicitly about mass gatherings. As I've said above, I don't know how he's going to justify it, given what the medical and scientific officers alongside him said only a few days ago. But it's clearly about crowds, not just about football, and therefore entirely different to the reasons the PL and EFL called off games today and next week.

I agree with you completely though about the relaxation coming sooner rather than later, and driven by economic factors more than health considerations. Lockdowns like those in Italy just can't be sustained without the whole economy not just going into recession, but being completely wrecked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...