Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Loderingo

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Fair enough, so it looks as though Brighton returned a zero positive number from this week’s testing even though three of their players tested positive 10 days ago ... confusing!

I know someone who's had 7 tests at different stages of illness and have had several negative and positive tests. They really aren't very reliable but it's all we have to go on I suppose 

Edited by OldlandReddies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OldlandReddies said:

I know someone who's had 7 tests at different stages of illness and have had several negative and positive tests. They really aren't very reliable but it's all we have to go on I suppose 

Yep, that’s why the gov is saying we carried out over 177k tests over the last day but only on around 62k people ... this virus is very new and people need more than one test at the moment ... but that doesn’t stop plonkers like Piers Morgan exploding hysterically on social media about testing levels because he isn’t intelligent enough to realise that the number of tests doesn’t equate to the number of people tested ... he’s a scaremongering **** and the media as a whole need to take a long, hard look at themselves after this, they have been appalling and abysmal throughout...

Edited by BS4 on Tour...
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Yep, that’s why the gov is saying we carried out over 177k tests over the last day but only on around 62k people ... this virus is very new and people need more than one test at the moment ... but that doesn’t stop plonkers like Piers Morgan exploding hysterically on social media about testing levels because he isn’t intelligent enough to realise that the number of tests doesn’t equate to the number of people tested ... he’s a scaremongering **** and the media as a whole need to take a long, hard look at themselves after this, they have been appalling and abysmal throughout...

Not sure you can totally blame the media, There has been a lot of good reports going around. As for your last line you could be talking about this Government.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Every option has issues. Carrying on, when safe, has the fewest.  It should be quite simple for players to have rolling contracts.  Certainly simpler than law suits from the likes of West Brom for lost revenue. 

Your comment regarding it being too early isn’t relevant in a debate of scrap v finish. German football will hopefully prove what’s achievable. 

Its very relevant, if waiting was as simple as you suggest why aren't the authorities just sitting back with their feet up waiting for all this to blow over, why have the French, Dutch and Belgian FA's cancelled their seasons? The issue with contracts, loans, scheduling impact on future seasons and international tournaments mean there is a very short window of time to in which to get this season finished which is currently what the English football authorities are trying to accomplish, predominantly to minimise the financial exposure to all parties. The flip side in doing this in the timeframe they have to play with is that you are exposing players to more risk than if the season were cancelled, more risk than the Government are asking pretty much everyone else in the UK to be taking at the moment with social distancing measures (other than frontline NHS staff and other keyworkers) hence the likes of Danny Rose, Troy Deeney and others raising concerns. Thats why I believe it is too early, you would like to think that by August the risk of spread will be much lower and therefore we will be getting back to some semblence of normality at which time players could be reasonably expected to go back to work in a normal capacity and start next season from fresh but by which time it would be too late for the current season to be finished as contracts will have expired, the next two seasons scheduling would be to cock, transfer windows etc.

As for it being "quite simple for players to have rolling contracts" I really don't think it will be each player will be different and have their own agenda to consider, look at Lee Bowyers comments on Lyle Taylor's situation from Charlton, he won't be the only one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

Its very relevant, if waiting was as simple as you suggest why aren't the authorities just sitting back with their feet up waiting for all this to blow over, why have the French, Dutch and Belgian FA's cancelled their seasons? The issue with contracts, loans, scheduling impact on future seasons and international tournaments mean there is a very short window of time to in which to get this season finished which is currently what the English football authorities are trying to accomplish, predominantly to minimise the financial exposure to all parties. The flip side in doing this in the timeframe they have to play with is that you are exposing players to more risk than if the season were cancelled, more risk than the Government are asking pretty much everyone else in the UK to be taking at the moment with social distancing measures (other than frontline NHS staff and other keyworkers) hence the likes of Danny Rose, Troy Deeney and others raising concerns. Thats why I believe it is too early, you would like to think that by August the risk of spread will be much lower and therefore we will be getting back to some semblence of normality at which time players could be reasonably expected to go back to work in a normal capacity and start next season from fresh but by which time it would be too late for the current season to be finished as contracts will have expired, the next two seasons scheduling would be to cock, transfer windows etc.

As for it being "quite simple for players to have rolling contracts" I really don't think it will be each player will be different and have their own agenda to consider, look at Lee Bowyers comments on Lyle Taylor's situation from Charlton, he won't be the only one.

So you want to scrap the season. What if we start another one and there is another wave? Scrap that one? Start another and then maybe scrap that one? Sounds like fun! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So you want to scrap the season. What if we start another one and there is another wave? Scrap that one? Start another and then maybe scrap that one? Sounds like fun! 

Nothing associated with whats going on at the moment and the impact its having on peoples everyday lives can be considered fun but with the information and consequences we are dealing with at this point in time I believe scraping this season is the best option, by August we would hope to be on top of the virus and have enough information and safety measures in place or available to avoid a second wave and a repeat of the current minefield the football world is trying to navigate through.

Don't get me wrong if and when they do restart I will be watching whether I agree with it or not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

Nothing associated with whats going on at the moment and the impact its having on peoples everyday lives can be considered fun but with the information and consequences we are dealing with at this point in time I believe scraping this season is the best option, by August we would hope to be on top of the virus and have enough information and safety measures in place or available to avoid a second wave and a repeat of the current minefield the football world is trying to navigate through.

Don't get me wrong if and when they do restart I will be watching whether I agree with it or not!

So you would scrap it again if a second wave happened or a new virus happened? I just think setting that precedent is crazy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Super said:

Not sure you can totally blame the media, There has been a lot of good reports going around. As for your last line you could be talking about this Government.

For me its both. The scaremongering from the media from the very start has been beyond hysterical, and has frightened the life out of society in a way that it will be difficult to ever get back to true normality. As for the government, well they had a duty to protect our most vulnerable, and they have failed miserably. What has happened in the care homes is a national travesty.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So you would scrap it again if a second wave happened or a new virus happened? I just think setting that precedent is crazy.  

That is a hypothetical situation though rather than the one we are faced with currently and a decision on it would depend on a number of factors i.e.

  • At what point in the season are we when this second wave / new virus hits? Obviously the earlier in the season we were the greater length of time  you have to play with in terms of condensing the remaining schedule
  • What government imposed restrictions are we under? If its a new virus is it more deadly than this one and therefore a more severe lockdown required? Is it as easily transmissable therefore reducing the risk of passing it on between players and coaching staff etc?
  • How long a shut-down period are we looking at? If its 1 month then probably not, if its 6 months then probably.
  • Has the football league already been restructured by this hypothetcial situation to take into account the clubs that could be lost due to the current outbreak? If so there could be less games to worry about and make finishing in this instance more likely

There would no doubt countless other variable's to consider so to say that whatever decision is arrived at in this pandemic (or wave of) would be the hard and fast rule for any future outbreaks is never going to be the case.

My view on this current season is based on the known factors currently in play.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

That is a hypothetical situation though rather than the one we are faced with currently and a decision on it would depend on a number of factors i.e.

  • At what point in the season are we when this second wave / new virus hits? Obviously the earlier in the season we were the greater length of time  you have to play with in terms of condensing the remaining schedule
  • What government imposed restrictions are we under? If its a new virus is it more deadly than this one and therefore a more severe lockdown required? Is it as easily transmissable therefore reducing the risk of passing it on between players and coaching staff etc?
  • How long a shut-down period are we looking at? If its 1 month then probably not, if its 6 months then probably.
  • Has the football league already been restructured by this hypothetcial situation to take into account the clubs that could be lost due to the current outbreak? If so there could be less games to worry about and make finishing in this instance more likely

There would no doubt countless other variable's to consider so to say that whatever decision is arrived at in this pandemic (or wave of) would be the hard and fast rule for any future outbreaks is never going to be the case.

My view on this current season is based on the known factors currently in play.

Or just set a precedent that seasons can be fluid, contracts can run by seasons rather than by dates and work things out now to keep it going and mean that season are never scrapped.  It takes something away from the sport if every season could technically be scrapped at some point.  Makes it completely ridiculous 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Yep, that’s why the gov is saying we carried out over 177k tests over the last day but only on around 62k people ... this virus is very new and people need more than one test at the moment ... but that doesn’t stop plonkers like Piers Morgan exploding hysterically on social media about testing levels because he isn’t intelligent enough to realise that the number of tests doesn’t equate to the number of people tested ... he’s a scaremongering **** and the media as a whole need to take a long, hard look at themselves after this, they have been appalling and abysmal throughout...

The numbers aren’t worth the websites they are shown on, or the press briefings they are mentioned at.

The 177k “tests” comprised:

  • 80k tests posted out (so not even with the recipient yet)
  • 23k pillar 4 tests, eg. Random tests for behavioural / science purposes

Even that doesn’t mean there were 74k tests processed the previous day, because the “people tested” isn’t broken down like that.

Yesterday was one of the lowest numbers of “people tested” (60k) since the big back-slapping fudged 100k tests were achieved.  The day before, the day the “people tested” was unavailable due to a technical issue (really???), was the lowest - 48k!!!

It has taken several days of tracking the numbers to understand the true profile of the relationship between “tests” and “people tested”, especially in pillar 2.  And it’s fair to say there isn’t one!!!  From the published data, there is no way of telling how many people requesting a test because they think they have symptoms, are actually sending the test back and being processed by the lab.

The data published on Sunday showed:

974D73B7-C6C9-46F5-A25B-CD3C0D63B851.jpeg.7278dcb2d7ae1d3adda2f1cb99f3a1a3.jpeg
 

  • more “people tested” than the actual “tests” (minus those posted out!)
  • we know there are tests counted that fail
  • we know there are multiple tests per oerson
  • so we know the “people tested” includes tests previously posted out and returned.

We don’t know how many.

But looking at the figures each day, it is not a very high percentage that are being returned!  That is a waste of sending testing kits out.  The cynical person might think kits are being send out just to boost the numbers???

Why was there sudden increase in on average 25k posted kits per day to 80k.  A big mail shot has gone out to get them near the new arbitrary 200k per day.

Can’t wait to see the “number of posted tests” today.

The posted tests are meant to be for people who think they have covid symptoms or live with someone who think they have it.  So 55k more people yesterday thought they needed a test?  If it’s not a mail shot, then I’d be really worried a lot more people think they have caught covid....and the government should be really worried that it’s spreading.

But going back to my initial sentence, the numbers are Propaganda.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Or just set a precedent that seasons can be fluid, contracts can run by seasons rather than by dates and work things out now to keep it going and mean that season are never scrapped.  It takes something away from the sport if every season could technically be scrapped at some point.  Makes it completely ridiculous 

as long as all parties are in agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Or just set a precedent that seasons can be fluid, contracts can run by seasons rather than by dates and work things out now to keep it going and mean that season are never scrapped.  It takes something away from the sport if every season could technically be scrapped at some point.  Makes it completely ridiculous 

Trouble is you can’t just wait to play this season. UEFA have set a deadline of August to complete games. That is why some countries have looked at the situation and decided they can’t finish. You just can’t change the rules 3/4 of a way through the season. Clubs have budgeted to a certain date and rolling on the end date will send clubs bankrupt.  Clubs are hoping that players will roll over there contracts but league 1 clubs who loan players can’t afford them. 


Why should we have to pay all of Moore wages at Blackpool or Semenyeo at Sunderland Morrell at Lincoln when we have no money coming in so that other clubs can finish there seasons whenever and have a fair league. How is that fair on us paying out, we were getting money for them to be out on loan.
 

Got to be fair all round so that leagues have some fairness and integrity. You have to draw a line somewhere and say enough is enough..

League 2 have done it due to finances and it seems only 6 clubs in L1 want to play on which are the ones with the most money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Or just set a precedent that seasons can be fluid, contracts can run by seasons rather than by dates and work things out now to keep it going and mean that season are never scrapped.  It takes something away from the sport if every season could technically be scrapped at some point.  Makes it completely ridiculous 

A very good suggestion in principle which would overcome some of the current issues but also provide a whole host of new ones in that it would generally protect players more than the clubs, it may be something that is implemented in time although my gut feel is that it wouldn't be, ultimatley however that is not where clubs and players currently sit legally

Whats happening at present is a 1 in 100 year occurence in terms of a global issue so its highly unlikely scrapping seasons are ever going to need to be considered in our lifetime again unless the aftermath of this leads to a war of some description.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

A very good suggestion in principle which would overcome some of the current issues but also provide a whole host of new ones in that it would generally protect players more than the clubs, it may be something that is implemented in time although my gut feel is that it wouldn't be, ultimatley however that is not where clubs and players currently sit legally

Whats happening at present is a 1 in 100 year occurence in terms of a global issue so its highly unlikely scrapping seasons are ever going to need to be considered in our lifetime again unless the aftermath of this leads to a war of some description.

China have apparently discovered a new virus so maybe not 100 years until the next one.  I just think whatever decision is made now is the precedent so it must be the correct one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

The numbers aren’t worth the websites they are shown on, or the press briefings they are mentioned at.

The 177k “tests” comprised:

  • 80k tests posted out (so not even with the recipient yet)
  • 23k pillar 4 tests, eg. Random tests for behavioural / science purposes

Even that doesn’t mean there were 74k tests processed the previous day, because the “people tested” isn’t broken down like that.

Yesterday was one of the lowest numbers of “people tested” (60k) since the big back-slapping fudged 100k tests were achieved.  The day before, the day the “people tested” was unavailable due to a technical issue (really???), was the lowest - 48k!!!

It has taken several days of tracking the numbers to understand the true profile of the relationship between “tests” and “people tested”, especially in pillar 2.  And it’s fair to say there isn’t one!!!  From the published data, there is no way of telling how many people requesting a test because they think they have symptoms, are actually sending the test back and being processed by the lab.

The data published on Sunday showed:

974D73B7-C6C9-46F5-A25B-CD3C0D63B851.jpeg.7278dcb2d7ae1d3adda2f1cb99f3a1a3.jpeg
 

  • more “people tested” than the actual “tests” (minus those posted out!)
  • we know there are tests counted that fail
  • we know there are multiple tests per oerson
  • so we know the “people tested” includes tests previously posted out and returned.

We don’t know how many.

But looking at the figures each day, it is not a very high percentage that are being returned!  That is a waste of sending testing kits out.  The cynical person might think kits are being send out just to boost the numbers???

Why was there sudden increase in on average 25k posted kits per day to 80k.  A big mail shot has gone out to get them near the new arbitrary 200k per day.

Can’t wait to see the “number of posted tests” today.

The posted tests are meant to be for people who think they have covid symptoms or live with someone who think they have it.  So 55k more people yesterday thought they needed a test?  If it’s not a mail shot, then I’d be really worried a lot more people think they have caught covid....and the government should be really worried that it’s spreading.

But going back to my initial sentence, the numbers are Propaganda.

 

What is the source of the numbers in your ‘graphic’ Dave?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will city still be 7th on a points per game situation if 51% of championship teams decide to end season. 

 

Just seen this.

 

Leeds and West Brom would automatically be promoted from the Championship to the Premier League. The play-offs would see Fulham, Brentford, Nottingham Forest and Preston compete for promotion.

Charlton, Luton and Barnsley would drop down from the Championship into League One.

Edited by ITK.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being this close, and within a very good chance of getting into the top 6 especially with everyone back, would be annoying if we missed out because of this.

But, it's still irrelevant really in the scheme of things.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Taz said:

Being this close, and within a very good chance of getting into the top 6 especially with everyone back, would be annoying if we missed out because of this.

But, it's still irrelevant really in the scheme of things.

Absolutely. We are in a great position and who knows with a bit of luck etc. Obviously more important things going on like you said.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do we think 51% is likely at this stage?

Well, the top 2 would be happy to curtail under that arrangement. Brentford and Forest too perhaps as they'd struggle to catch top 2. Preston would achieve their aim of playoffs. 

So in the top 6, only Fulham could vote for resumption, teams 7th to 13th would surely vote for resumption? As would bottom 3. 

So I make it 11 vote to resume. 13 vote to curtail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

If the season is curtailed, City will rue the goal conceded in the 84th minute against Fulham as being the moment that we missed out on the play offs...

Was only thinking about that the other night.

7 minutes ago, mozo said:

So do we think 51% is likely at this stage?

Well, the top 2 would be happy to curtail under that arrangement. Brentford and Forest too perhaps as they'd struggle to catch top 2. Preston would achieve their aim of playoffs. 

So in the top 6, only Fulham could vote for resumption, teams 7th to 13th would surely vote for resumption? As would bottom 3. 

So I make it 11 vote to resume. 13 vote to curtail.

It is understood / rumoured (?) that both Leeds and West Brom want to continue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Was only thinking about that the other night.

To be fair, that was a good result and an improved performance from us so hardly a balls up from us.

 

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

It is understood / rumoured (?) that both Leeds and West Brom want to continue.

I can't see the logic but could well be true and there could be other surprises too.

  • Like 1
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...