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

[pillred]

1 hour ago, Back of the net said:

Totally agree.  However, not everyone is as responsible as you.

If everyone did as asked and took social distancing seriously we would be experiencing lots more of what we enjoy. 

It's not the match itself; clubs will manage this properly, it's the fact that you can't trust some people to act responsibly before and after the game.   If it was me I'd let fans in but on the provision that 1) all pubs nearby are shut and 2) all nearby parking restrictions are lifted (where safe) so it's easy for everyone who can drive, to drive to the game.  For example we could use the park and ride at long ashton so people can walk to the ground.

Far to sensible I'm afraid that's why it wont happen, unfortunately.

[downendcity]

11 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

I was at Taunton v Wantage tonight in the fa cup, a crowd of 353, ( they are allowed a maximum of 600) no issues at all, people social distancing and plenty of stewards policing this.

As long as people are sensible, I really can’t see why grounds cannot be open for fans at all levels with 20% of the capacity allowed to watch. 

Therein, sadly, lies the problem.

If people had been sensible from the outset and followed the guidelines we would not be in this position. From the outset it was pretty clear that this virus was deadly and virulent, but could only be transmitted if we let it through our own actions. Wash hands, and keep social distancing were the initial guidelines, but even when lockdown ended too many seemed to have a problem interpreting those simple rules. More recently, wearing a mask in a shop  and observing social distancing has proved equally taxing for far too many people - how many people think having the elastic over your ears constitutes wearing a mask, not whether it overs the nose and mouth?

Mrs Downend says it is only a minority that are not following the rules, but with this virus  it is the actions of that minority that are causing the problem that affects the majority. Only the other day there was a report of a guy returning from a foreign holiday who not only failed to observe quarantine on his return, but went on a pub crawl with his mates with who knows how many new infections resulting. 

I've read comments where people are quoted as saying that if they want to take the risk, then why shouldn't they be allowed so to do. The reason is that they are not just risking themselves, but every other person they come into contact with, most of whom are not prepared to take the same degree of risk.

I suspect that football at all levels, but especially lower down the pyramid, would have been able to organise and police a safe return for limited numbers of fans. That they are not yet allowed to do so is down to the selfish actions of a minority of the population that have been unable, or unwilling, to excercise any personal responsibility over the last few months.

 

 

 

[CyderInACan]

Meanwhile in Brasil . . . 

With 4.5 million cases and more than 138,000 fatalities from Covid-19, Brazil is the second worst-hit country in the world in terms of deaths. On Tuesday it recorded 33,536 infections and 836 deaths.

Despite this Brazil's government has said football stadiums can open their doors to fans - at 30% capacity at first but that could increase. In Rio de Janeiro's Maracanã stadium that would mean 25,000 people in the stands.

City authorities can veto the decision - Belo Horizonte has already said it won't be bringing fans back in yet, according to Brazilian media reports.

And clubs are struggling to keep their players virus-free. One league match last month was cancelled minutes before kick-off when members of one team tested positive. And on Tuesday Flamengo were due to play in a Copa Libertadores tie, but seven players and two staff tested positive before the match

[Super]

2 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Meanwhile in Brasil . . . 

With 4.5 million cases and more than 138,000 fatalities from Covid-19, Brazil is the second worst-hit country in the world in terms of deaths. On Tuesday it recorded 33,536 infections and 836 deaths.

Despite this Brazil's government has said football stadiums can open their doors to fans - at 30% capacity at first but that could increase. In Rio de Janeiro's Maracanã stadium that would mean 25,000 people in the stands.

City authorities can veto the decision - Belo Horizonte has already said it won't be bringing fans back in yet, according to Brazilian media reports.

And clubs are struggling to keep their players virus-free. One league match last month was cancelled minutes before kick-off when members of one team tested positive. And on Tuesday Flamengo were due to play in a Copa Libertadores tie, but seven players and two staff tested positive before the match

I would advise everyone to do the complete opposite to what Brazil do.

[Davefevs]

41 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Therein, sadly, lies the problem.

If people had been sensible from the outset

That appears to put it all back on “people”.  Many people were sensible well before our effing idiot of a PM took action.  He was still shaking hands with hospital patients, holding face to face briefings, telling everyone it was all ok.  Then allowing events to go ahead like Cheltenham.  The Irish took it seriously and cancelled their national day.  I was taking my kids out of school, cancelling family and friends meet-ups we had planned.  Our PM was giving people one last piss-up.  He was too slow and too indecisive.

and followed the guidelines we would not be in this position. From the outset it was pretty clear that this virus was deadly and virulent, but could only be transmitted if we let it through our own actions.

yet we we continually told it was nothing!  To the uneducated, the blinkered, the brainwashed and those who don’t give a toss, it was a “carry on as normal” message.  

Wash hands, and keep social distancing were the initial guidelines, but even when lockdown ended too many seemed to have a problem interpreting those simple rules.

not helped by people in positions of responsibility flouting the rules.

and business owners seeing their businesses struggle whilst friends of the government are profiteering, tantamount to money laundering.

no wonder a small element if the people rebel.

More recently, wearing a mask in a shop  and observing social distancing has proved equally taxing for far too many people - how many people think having the elastic over your ears constitutes wearing a mask, not whether it overs the nose and mouth?

Mrs Downend says it is only a minority that are not following the rules, but with this virus  it is the actions of that minority that are causing the problem that affects the majority. Only the other day there was a report of a guy returning from a foreign holiday who not only failed to observe quarantine on his return, but went on a pub crawl with his mates with who knows how many new infections resulting.

no argument with this....but we now live in a selfish society.  I’ll leave that there.

I've read comments where people are quoted as saying that if they want to take the risk, then why shouldn't they be allowed so to do. The reason is that they are not just risking themselves, but every other person they come into contact with, most of whom are not prepared to take the same degree of risk.

I suspect that football at all levels, but especially lower down the pyramid, would have been able to organise and police a safe return for limited numbers of fans. That they are not yet allowed to do so is down to the selfish actions of a minority of the population that have been unable, or unwilling, to excercise any personal responsibility over the last few months.

I suspect so too, but unfortunately the priorities of easing lockdown in places like pubs was done too quickly, to allow a safe easing of other things like schools.  The lip service of “our kids education is vital” versus “go to the pub” tells me everything.

With better plans, clear criteria, rather than continued moving if the goalposts, poignant in this discussion, we could have a better evaluation of the risks of outdoor entertainment versus indoor.  Instead we have a blunt tool, because the government tried to look after their mates.

 

 

 

Rant above

Edited September 23, 2020 by Davefevs

[Matthew me]

I'm getting really tired of listening to clubs in lower leagues asking the government to bail them out. It's not right that tax payers money funds football. 

Tax payers money needs to pay for the NHS, medical supplies, and supporting people that have fallen on hard times. Some families have lost everything and its distasteful to hear football clubs coming out with cap in hand

This is a football issue that should be solved by football clubs

The wage bill of the premier is more than £2bn. If all players lose 5% of salary for one year, this equates to £100,000,000. Enough to cover the entire wage bill of league one and two.

So many of the tip flight players owe their living to the lower leagues. Time to lose a measly 5% and support them.

Asking the average Joe in the street earning £20k a year to pay his taxes to keep Fleetwood afloat is immoral

Do the right thing football. Let any money we have left in government go to people that really need it 

Rant over 

 

[Matthew me]

Not a specific dig at Fleetwood ..

For the record

[TonyTonyTony]

You can't blame them for asking for a handout - the NL/L1/L2 clubs are in the shite big time, but i agree the help should some from within football. There is enough money sloshing about. 

[Davefevs]

Too complicated an argument with too many dynamics to formulate a full response.

But, why would a football club in the entertainment and hospitality sector be treated differently to another business in that sector, whose trade has been restrained by the government?

Agree with Triple-T above that football could help itself also.

The government’s range of financial support packages were ill-conceived imho, and now they are about to end things like CJRS (Furloughing).  It won’t be just football clubs “bleating” once October hits!

[Furious Custard]

Agree that the government should not bail out any clubs. And I think there is a zero percent chance they will. Some clubs are starting to get desperate and I think that this is the beginning of the end for many which is sad. But life goes on, its only football.

I also disagree that players should have to foot the bill. Regardless of the amount they earn. Its up to the leagues to support the clubs. 

There is a 200m fund from the PL available providing the championship has a wage cap. Problem solved. I dont care if it widens the gap between the championship and the PL. 

[Matthew me]

8 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

You can't blame them for asking for a handout - the NL/L1/L2 clubs are in the shite big time, but i agree the help should some from within football. There is enough money sloshing about. 

With agents fees as high as they are, salaries, naming rights etc, I feel it's more of a moral issue for the big boys to help their feeder clubs 

[Matthew me]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Too complicated an argument with too many dynamics to formulate a full response.

But, why would a football club in the entertainment and hospitality sector be treated differently to another business in that sector, whose trade has been restrained by the government?

Agree with Triple-T above that football could help itself also.

The government’s range of financial support packages were ill-conceived imho, and now they are about to end things like CJRS (Furloughing).  It won’t be just football clubs “bleating” once October hits!

Football clubs did get the same support as hospitality businesses , no issue they had furlough. 

But why should we spend tax payers money on a football club when we have a trillion of national debt and nurses earning £25k to risk their lives to save us.

It's a football issue, sort it internally

Other hospitality industries don't have a multi billion group of clubs at the top that feed from lower levels 

If the government pay to support football clubs, it's a sad sad day. It's a case of survival from your own industry 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Matthew me said:

Football clubs did get the same support as hospitality businesses , no issue they had furlough. 

But why should we spend tax payers money on a football club when we have a trillion of national debt and nurses earning £25k to risk their lives to save us.

it shouldn’t be getting special treatment, but I suspect football won’t be the only industry under serious trouble with the latest lockdown.  The government seem to imply its “economy first, people’s lives second”, so they should be putting support measures in place to help those businesses who’s trade they’ve constrained by putting lockdown back in.  Perhaps just extending CJRS woukd help.  Other countries have by 12-24 months.  But our government are too busy giving £108m contracts for PPE to one man bands, because one of their mates is profiteering.  If they weren’t “washing” public money through their mates, and eventually offshore no doubt, we might see nurses paid properly.  Football isn’t the reason for nurses pay...if only our taxes were being used like the voting public told they were gonna be used.

It's a football issue, sort it internally

no, it’s a covid issue, impacting many, many industries.

Other hospitality industries don't have a multi billion group of clubs at the top that feed from lower levels

not my area of expertise but I suspect there are some huge entertainment businesses outside of football too....and I suspect they have supply chains similarly impacted.  Are they bailing out them?

If the government pay to support football clubs, it's a sad sad day. It's a case of survival from your own industry

An industry forced to be unable to trade because of a virus and measures imposed by the government.  Enough businesses have gone to the wall through covid...ineptitude of our government in dealing with it has exacerbated the impact.  Remember it was gonna all be over in 12 weeks!!!

 

[Lrrr]

McAnthony (Posh) is asking for a loan (with interest) from the premier league to help lower league and non league clubs, but said he’s not optimistic 

[IAmNick]

29 minutes ago, Matthew me said:

Other hospitality industries don't have a multi billion group of clubs at the top that feed from lower levels 

 

So do you support smaller pubs going out of business as long as Wetherspoons can keep going?

Local theatres as long as the next Avengers movie gets made?

Local restaurants as long as Pizza Express is alright?

Family B&Bs as long as Premier Inn are ok?

Do you think all those large corporations don't/haven't benefitted from the smaller ones they bought up / took staff from / forcibly closed and replaced etc. along the way? Surely you should be advocating for them to do the same? It's not a football problem, it's a societal/capitalism problem!

[Super]

1 hour ago, Matthew me said:

I'm getting really tired of listening to clubs in lower leagues asking the government to bail them out. It's not right that tax payers money funds football. 

Tax payers money needs to pay for the NHS, medical supplies, and supporting people that have fallen on hard times. Some families have lost everything and its distasteful to hear football clubs coming out with cap in hand

This is a football issue that should be solved by football clubs

The wage bill of the premier is more than £2bn. If all players lose 5% of salary for one year, this equates to £100,000,000. Enough to cover the entire wage bill of league one and two.

So many of the tip flight players owe their living to the lower leagues. Time to lose a measly 5% and support them.

Asking the average Joe in the street earning £20k a year to pay his taxes to keep Fleetwood afloat is immoral

Do the right thing football. Let any money we have left in government go to people that really need it 

Rant over 

 

Hard to disagree with any of that tbh.

[Bristol Rob]

1 hour ago, Matthew me said:

I'm getting really tired of listening to clubs in lower leagues asking the government to bail them out. It's not right that tax payers money funds football. 

Tax payers money needs to pay for the NHS, medical supplies, and supporting people that have fallen on hard times. Some families have lost everything and its distasteful to hear football clubs coming out with cap in hand

This is a football issue that should be solved by football clubs

The wage bill of the premier is more than £2bn. If all players lose 5% of salary for one year, this equates to £100,000,000. Enough to cover the entire wage bill of league one and two.

So many of the tip flight players owe their living to the lower leagues. Time to lose a measly 5% and support them.

Asking the average Joe in the street earning £20k a year to pay his taxes to keep Fleetwood afloat is immoral

Do the right thing football. Let any money we have left in government go to people that really need it 

Rant over 

 

Well, I wrote a long response taking this post to pieces and then some (doubtless well meaning) moderator merged threads - probably whilst aware people were reading it. This my reply is lost in the either now.

Suffice to say I'm right and this post above is wrong.

I could even show my workings and everything.

[phantom]

50 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

McAnthony (Posh) is asking for a loan (with interest) from the premier league to help lower league and non league clubs, but said he’s not optimistic 

Peter Risdale was on Talksport this morning, he mentioned that PNE could finacially support the football team for this and next season under current restrictions.

Clearly not all clubs are in the same position

[Lrrr]

1 minute ago, phantom said:

Peter Risdale was on Talksport this morning, he mentioned that PNE could finacially support the football team for this and next season under current restrictions.

Clearly not all clubs are in the same position

Yeah Preston's minimal outlay on wages will help them with TV money we receive meaning they can stretch it further, championship clubs without parachute payments with a large wage bill could be in trouble. 

[Matthew me]

56 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

So do you support smaller pubs going out of business as long as Wetherspoons can keep going?

Local theatres as long as the next Avengers movie gets made?

Local restaurants as long as Pizza Express is alright?

Family B&Bs as long as Premier Inn are ok?

Do you think all those large corporations don't/haven't benefitted from the smaller ones they bought up / took staff from / forcibly closed and replaced etc. along the way? Surely you should be advocating for them to do the same? It's not a football problem, it's a societal/capitalism problem!

Fairly sure you've missed the point. I was saying exactly that! The big boys need to support the smaller clubs as they feed from them and make our leagues the best in the world

[Bristol Rob]

6 minutes ago, phantom said:

Peter Risdale was on Talksport this morning, he mentioned that PNE could finacially support the football team for this and next season under current restrictions.

Clearly not all clubs are in the same position

Ridsdale is hardly a go-to spokesperson for financial football advice or clarity.

He has spend longer in administration that Trump's 'under audit' tax returns.

[Son of Fred]

6 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

No I’m not. Ive watched nearly ten games this season with crowds, and have come into close contact with no one. I’m in the open air, always at least 2 metres from anyone else, what is the problem ?

I go to work everyday with 60 other people and come closer to my fellow workers than I have at these football matches. I go shopping at a supermarket and come closer to people than I do at football matches. 

Stay sensible is my motto, if you aren’t able to, then that’s your choice. 

 

You'll nae be inside Ashton Gate this season......fact.

Open your eyes & look around you,,it's for real...infection rates up,,,,,hospital admissions rising steadily...

Kid yourself if you prefer.

[CyderInACan]

58 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Ridsdale is hardly a go-to spokesperson for financial football advice or clarity.

 

Top man though if you need advice on leasing fishtanks and goldfish. 

[bcfc01]

12 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Top man though if you need advice on leasing fishtanks and goldfish. 

You can lease a goldfish ?

Every day's a school day.

[Tipps69]

2 hours ago, phantom said:

Peter Risdale was on Talksport this morning, he mentioned that PNE could finacially support the football team for this and next season under current restrictions.

Clearly not all clubs are in the same position

I don’t think PNE have actually bought anyone during this transfer window. Maybe they are one of very few that actually took what is happening in the world into consideration?

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Lrrr said:

Yeah Preston's minimal outlay on wages will help them with TV money we receive meaning they can stretch it further, championship clubs without parachute payments with a large wage bill could be in trouble. 

For all clubs, it'll ultimately depend on a few factors taken as a whole:

1. Fixed costs.
2. Wealth of the owners.
3. Ability of the owners to access that wealth and quickly.
4. Willingness of the owners to keep writing the cheques.

Hemmings is worth between £500m-1bn according to searches, as you say low wages- TV money, they'll be fine. Still the Championship even parachute clubs, is a loss making League even in normal times- cash flow is what kills businesses.

[Mr Popodopolous]

24 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

I don’t think PNE have actually bought anyone during this transfer window. Maybe they are one of very few that actually took what is happening in the world into consideration?

Agreed.

Think the loosening of P&S regulations has played a part in the uptick of spending- won't post about it much on here but some will be gambling on promotion this season no doubt, seeing the PL Sky money as a ticket to Easy Street- maybe salvation is applicable in some cases but a bit of a stretch in others.

Looking at the Premier League, it's interesting to note that Tottenham a number of months ago took out a £175m loan from Bank of England due to impact of Covid...yet are now loaning Bale and signing a left back from Real Madrid!

That money should be ringfenced, but who knows if it turned out that way in practice?

Edited September 23, 2020 by Mr Popodopolous

[CyderInACan]

51 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

You can lease a goldfish ?

Every day's a school day.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/funny_old_game/1469059.stm

And to think we love a fish-related pun on here - the Beeb were at it nearly 20 years ago! 

[phantom]

2 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

Ridsdale is hardly a go-to spokesperson for financial football advice or clarity.

He has spend longer in administration that Trump's 'under audit' tax returns.

Yet ironically the club he is involved with, is one of the few actually adapting to the surroundings

Try saying the same to those clubs in the Premier league spending miliions still on players

[Grey Fox]

1 hour ago, CyderInACan said:

Top man though if you need advice on leasing fishtanks and goldfish. 

So it’s a case of sink or swim