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

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, RumRed said:

Can easily work from home, still expected in the office with the other 50 odd people though.

 

Ditto.

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

Didn’t the Italian government announce that all mortgage/rent and utility bill charges have been suspended for the foreseeable future? Don’t know the ins and outs of the detail but that must be reassuring for their populace if true ...

Indeed they did- that's the thing if it's a national emergency and people's income and ecomomy is clobbered by it we all need to make sacrifices if it reaches that point- well not sacrifices but deferrals, otherwise we risk chaos.

On a similar vein:

@BTRFTG

 Would be interested to know if that poster considers this to be necessary or nanny state etc.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[MarcusX]

10 hours ago, pillred said:

Funny how we managed for 100s of years before we joined the EU, don't worry I'm sure we will be fine we usually are.

Do we really have to get into that? Pre-EU Britain was very different. I wouldn't call 2 world wars and being nicknamed the "sick man" of Europe (could be appropriate in a couple of weeks) something to look back on fondly and strive towards

Or did you mean the British Empire?

[ChippenhamRed]

55 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

These are pretty selective photos. I just spent a week in London for work. Tubes were busy as usual, Paddington was busy. Heathrow T5 yesterday wasn't packed to the rafters but was pretty busy. Plane was full. 

Could have taken half a dozen photos myself that showed a totally different outlook than what you've put here from the papers.

 

53 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Okay thanks, that brings a bit more balance.

Still I'm not so certain...a number of those were outside London too it's worth remembering.

Secondly, just read that footfall on the tube last week was down 19%. If true it does suggest a fair few are taking up/requesting the work from home option where possible.

 

It's all only anecdotal evidence of course, but my family and I went to London for a day trip on Saturday (after much consideration).  The tube was noticeably quieter than normal.  We took the river ferry from Westminster to Tower and there was literally 12 people on it including us 4!  We went to the Tower of London and didn't have to queue at all to see the Crown Jewels - we literally walked straight in, and were able to view the jewels for as long as we wanted.  Covent Garden was busier in the evening, but still quiet by Covent-Garden-on-a-Saturday night standards.

It was almost eerily quiet at times - the thought of what that is doing to the economy already is frightening.

I suspect Saturday reveals more about the impact of the virus on London, because people who have no choice but to go to work during the week aren't there, leaving mainly tourists and people who choose to be there.  It was very clear to me that many people were choosing to stay away.

[LondonBristolian]

25 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

They were probably confident 100 years earlier, but look how that turned out.....

Fair point!

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

 

It's all only anecdotal evidence of course, but my family and I went to London for a day trip on Saturday (after much consideration).  The tube was noticeably quieter than normal.  We took the river ferry from Westminster to Tower and there was literally 12 people on it including us 4!  We went to the Tower of London and didn't have to queue at all to see the Crown Jewels - we literally walked straight in, and were able to view the jewels for as long as we wanted.  Covent Garden was busier in the evening, but still quiet by Covent-Garden-on-a-Saturday night standards.

It was almost eerily quiet at times - the thought of what that is doing to the economy already is frightening.

I suspect Saturday reveals more about the impact of the virus on London, because people who have no choice but to go to work during the week aren't there, leaving mainly tourists and people who choose to be there.  It was very clear to me that many people were choosing to stay away.

Yep, and I'm one of them.

Was planning to go up to London in March or April to see mate- or have them down Bristol. Or Liverpool to see a mate there as a Plan B.

Well no chance, not while this is ongoing.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[LondonBristolian]

34 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Trying to shut down legit questions by accusing people of politicising it. A bit of Government transparency wouldn't go amiss...something that @bcfc01 and @Robin-hugh-blind seem less than keen on too based on their posts last night.

BTRFTG does defend them quite a bit, but taking the Government out of it I wonder what the strategy really is...

 

I think the other thing that strikes me is people talk about the fact we are following the science but I think, in many cases, they don’t quite understand what that science is and how it differs to the science other countries are following.

 

I am both a layperson and trying to be simplistic but the key point that I am not sure is well understood is that we are following theoretical science based on models and predictions rather than evidential science based on experimentation and learning. Essentially the WHO are saying “this is what we know works based on what other countries have tried” whereas we are saying “this is what should be work, based on the assumptions and calculations we have made”.

 

Our approach is based on behavioural economics and theoretical modelling. Both of those fascinate me and I actually believe there are many situations where both can produce better results than following tried and tested practice but

 

a) they are both relatively new approaches and the evidence base for them is not by any means established, especially in the area of epidemics

 

b) both are only as good as the assumptions that people feed into the system and these can contain human error.

 

That is not necessarily a worse approach - there are situations where you might want to take a gamble based on a calculation in the hope it will provide better results than what is tried and tested - but it is a gamble and, in this case, the stakes are higher than in any decision the government has taken since World War Two. Get this wrong and we have an out of control epidemic, overcrowded hospitals and a lot of people will die who might otherwise have even saved.

 

Anyone who says we are following the science is absolutely right but any one who says we should therefore trust the science needs to factor in that nobody yet knows if the science can be trusted and we are virtually  the only country not following a WHO model with far more of an evidence base. Only time will tell if we will be seen as the country that stayed calm and acted smartly during a crisis or the country that went on a wild goose chase based on flawed science and thus failed to save lives.

 

[Taz]

9 minutes ago, Jerseybean said:

When we run out of face masks and have to improvise.... 

Well at least if she gets a nose bleed....

[ChippenhamRed]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Yep, and I'm one of them.

Was planning to go up to London in March or April to see mate- or have them down Bristol. Or Liverpool to see a mate there as a Plan B.

Well no chance, not while this is ongoing.

We agonised over the decision, having already committed money in advance, but decided to go on the basis of the prediction that we are still 10-14 weeks from peak, and that statistically the chances of getting the infection at this stage are still quite small.  I appreciate and respect that others would not make that choice.

To be honest even since Saturday my concern has grown to the point where if I had to make the same choice today, I would probably decide differently.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

 

I think the other thing that strikes me is people talk about the fact we are following the science but I think, in many cases, they don’t quite understand what that science is and how it differs to the science other countries are following.

 

I am both a layperson and trying to be simplistic but the key point that I am not sure is well understood is that we are following theoretical science based on models and predictions rather than evidential science based on experimentation and learning. Essentially the WHO are saying “this is what we know works based on what other countries have tried” whereas we are saying “this is what should be work, based on the assumptions and calculations we have made”.

 

Our approach is based on behavioural economics and theoretical modelling. Both of those fascinate me and I actually believe there are many situations where both can produce better results than following tried and tested practice but

 

a) they are both relatively new approaches and the evidence base for them is not by any means established, especially in the area of epidemics

 

b) both are only as good as the assumptions that people feed into the system and these can contain human error.

 

That is not necessarily a worse approach - there are situations where you might want to take a gamble based on a calculation in the hope it will provide better results than what is tried and tested - but it is a gamble and, in this case, the stakes are higher than in any decision the government has taken since World War Two. Get this wrong and we have an out of control epidemic, overcrowded hospitals and a lot of people will die who might otherwise have even saved.

 

Anyone who says we are following the science is absolutely right but any one who says we should therefore trust the science needs to factor in that nobody yet knows if the science can be trusted and we are virtually  the only country not following a WHO model with far more of an evidence base. Only time will tell if we will be seen as the country that stayed calm and acted smartly during a crisis or the country that went on a wild goose chase based on flawed science and thus failed to save lives.

 

Great post.

The bolded word gets to the heart of it IMO. Gamble...one hell of a gamble- it may prove to be a disaster, may prove to be a masterstroke but our approach appears to be unique- for better or for worse.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[Northern Red]

Picked my parents up from Manchester airport yesterday afternoon when they returned from Majorca (where the situation had changed virtually overnight on Saturday from everything being open to nothing being open) and I've never seen it so quiet. My parents said it was the quickest they'd ever got through passport control and baggage reclaim in 20 years of using the airport.

[pillred]

18 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Do we really have to get into that? Pre-EU Britain was very different. I wouldn't call 2 world wars and being nicknamed the "sick man" of Europe (could be appropriate in a couple of weeks) something to look back on fondly and strive towards

Or did you mean the British Empire?

Just generally, the keep calm and carry on slogan I think has summed up the British character and is particularly apt at this moment in time. And as for being the sick man of Europe I think considering our population we are relatively low down the numbers per head of population many more deaths in other EU countries with a lot less people so we must be doing something right, of course I can't predict what will happen in the future. 

Edited March 16, 2020 by pillred
Add comment

[Super]

53 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Nobody should be politicising this but it nonetheless alarms me that people are starting to use requests not to policitise this as a way to shut down legitimate questions about why we are pursing a strategy that runs contrary to what other countries are doing, contrary to WHO advice and contrary to the actions taken by those countries that do appear to have the outbreak under control.

We are being guided by science but nonetheless using different scientific advice to the scientific advice being followed by other countries, including countries with direct experience of containing pandemics that we lack.

In particular, the decision to no longer track or test cases that can be treated at home means we no longer know how and where the virus is spreading and that means - if the government’s models are wrong - we will not have the days to change course.

I have no desire to criticise the government on a political basis but people will die if the government get this wrong and it is vital that appropriate scientific scrutiny is not dismissed.

 

The Government will be judged on this that's for sure. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

A bit morbid so I hesitate to post but saw on Twitter.

As we know, the age pattern/profile seems to be that the older you are, the worse it gets/more at risk.

[RumRed]

6 minutes ago, pillred said:

Just generally, the keep calm and carry on slogan I think has summed up the British character and is particularly apt at this moment in time.

Walk into a hail of machine gun fire holding a stick and a Browning whilst keeping a stiff upper lip, gotcha.

[pillred]

8 minutes ago, RumRed said:

Walk into a hail of machine gun fire holding a stick and a Browning whilst keeping a stiff upper lip, gotcha.

Won us the war though didn't it.

[Maesknoll Red]

 

[One Team In Keynsham]

9 minutes ago, RumRed said:

Walk into a hail of machine gun fire holding a stick and a Browning whilst keeping a stiff upper lip, gotcha.

[lenred]

11 minutes ago, pillred said:

Just generally, the keep calm and carry on slogan I think has summed up the British character and is particularly apt at this moment in time. And as for being the sick man of Europe I think considering our population we are relatively low down the numbers per head of population many more deaths in other EU countries with a lot less people so we must be doing something right, of course I can't predict what will happen in the future. 

Really? Is that why all the panic buying has taken place then? Why supermarkets are having to put out messages on mass on social media asking people to be considerate of others and are restricting purchases of certain items? 
I think it’s a bullshit slogan theta easy to say during the good times but that has already been shown to be not true during the worrying times - as is being demonstrated currently by many of our fellow citizens unfortunately.  Luckily there are plenty of very decent minded people also, but to say that’s our national character is I’m afraid complete tosh!  

2 minutes ago, One Team In Keynsham said:

Wibble

[pillred]

10 minutes ago, lenred said:

Really? Is that why all the panic buying has taken place then? Why supermarkets are having to put out messages on mass on social media asking people to be considerate of others and are restricting purchases of certain items? 
I think it’s a bullshit slogan theta easy to say during the good times but that has already been shown to be not true during the worrying times - as is being demonstrated currently by many of our fellow citizens unfortunately.  Luckily there are plenty of very decent minded people also, but to say that’s our national character is I’m afraid complete tosh!  

Wibble

There are always some people who are r soles, the vast majority of people in this country do fall into the keep calm and carry on category, it's a national stereotype for a reason.

Edited March 16, 2020 by pillred
Add word

[Nogbad the Bad]

51 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Do we really have to get into that? Pre-EU Britain was very different. I wouldn't call 2 world wars and being nicknamed the "sick man" of Europe (could be appropriate in a couple of weeks) something to look back on fondly and strive towards

Or did you mean the British Empire?

Give it a rest ffs.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Any lessons to draw?

Edited March 16, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[lenred]

30 minutes ago, pillred said:

There are always some people who are r soles, the vast majority of people in this country do fall into the keep calm and carry on category, it's a national stereotype for a reason.

Calmness in adversity is not solely a British National trait.  It’s a saying from WW2 (where it had true meaning and purpose) that some clever marketing people have subsequently made lots of money from, but to suggest it’s an actual national stereotype is simply not true I’m afraid and the evidence is clearly being seen by the actions of many of our selfish compatriots unfortunately.  

Edited March 16, 2020 by lenred

[pillred]

11 minutes ago, lenred said:

Calmness in adversity is not solely a British National trait.  It’s a saying from WW2 (where it had true meaning and purpose) that some clever marketing people have subsequently made lots of money from, but to suggest it’s an actual national stereotype is simply not true I’m afraid and the evidence is clearly being seen by the actions of many of our selfish compatriots unfortunately.  

Yes maybe it's an older person kind of mindset (that's me include)  maybe not so true now, annoys the hell out of me all this hoarding and stuff.

[pillred]

The first vaccine is to be tested on human volunteers in the US, let's keep our fingers crossed it works.

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Didn’t the Italian government announce that all mortgage/rent and utility bill charges have been suspended for the foreseeable future? Don’t know the ins and outs of the detail but that must be reassuring for their populace if true ...

Italian Government have deployed this tactic many times over the years, which is why they change so frequently and are ever seeking funds from others in bailouts. Any monies owing aren't cancelled or annulled, they're deferred and longer payment terms means more expensive in the long run.

[Ska Junkie]

1 hour ago, Taz said:

Well at least if she gets a nose bleed....

 

[Vincent Vega]

Latest information from my daughter's school. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

20 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Italian Government have deployed this tactic many times over the years, which is why they change so frequently and are ever seeking funds from others in bailouts. Any monies owing aren't cancelled or annulled, they're deferred and longer payment terms means more expensive in the long run.

Italian Governance is pretty suspect but this is a unique situation, is it not?

Any solutions to the possible impending unemployment spike, with rent and mortgages outstanding?

Deferral in the circs seems a reasonable solution IMO in exceptional circs such as this.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ditto.

Indeed they did- that's the thing if it's a national emergency and people's income and ecomomy is clobbered by it we all need to make sacrifices if it reaches that point- well not sacrifices but deferrals, otherwise we risk chaos.

On a similar vein:

@BTRFTG

 Would be interested to know if that poster considers this to be necessary or nanny state etc.

Wholly different demographics: Norway with a population 7.4 % ( pop density 5%) of the UK's, one of the highest GDPs across the globe and reserves to die for. Ditto Sweden which is only 15% (pop density 8%) of UK's, high GDP and tax take. It would be impossible for the UK to follow suit given the far higher impact the virus is likely to have on high density population centres, of which there aren't any in either country. Even their capitals aren't that crowded.

Visit either country and you'll quickly appreciate keeping 2m apart isn't an issue.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Wholly different demographics: Norway with a population 7.4 % ( pop density 5%) of the UK's, one of the highest GDPs across the globe and reserves to die for. Ditto Sweden which is only 15% (pop density 8%) of UK's, high GDP and tax take. It would be impossible for the UK to follow suit given the far higher impact the virus is likely to have on high density population centres, of which there aren't any in either country. Even their capitals aren't that crowded.

Visit either country and you'll quickly appreciate keeping 2m apart isn't an issue.

Oh I don't disagree about the demographics argument- and Norway built up reserves out of their North Sea Oil didn't they, some sort of fund- a much lower population helps too.

We are densely populated...but if nothing is done, it is possible we could see a significant spike in unemployment and evictions.