Jump to content
IGNORED

EFL want twice weekly testing, no agreement yet on funding


Lrrr

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Estimated cost is £8k a week apparently- that's for the whole Football League or?

Pretty sure its per club, hence why a lot couldn't afford it and will probably object if the league tries making them pay for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The figure I saw perviously was £175 per test.

I'm guessing you would have to test players and staff, anyone close to the team.

say 35 staff per team .... 35 x 175 x 2  (tests per week) =  £12,250  

L1 & L2 clubs would struggle to find that. 

You multiply that by 72 teams, then roughly 4 months left .... £3,528,000 for the EFL to find.

Not saying this is 100% but from the figures I've seen, close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

Pretty sure its per club, hence why a lot couldn't afford it and will probably object if the league tries making them pay for it

Why so expensive i wonder ?  I'm in the wrong business so it seems.  Hold on, I'm retired ....... shite !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ohhhshauntaylor said:

Counter productive.... but having 50% capacity of fans in stadiums generates funds to then allow clubs to pay for excess testing! 
 

hard hat on- yes I know the repercussions 

I suppose testing will need to be completed to enable the football to continue but I tend to agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ohhhshauntaylor said:

Counter productive.... but having 50% capacity of fans in stadiums generates funds to then allow clubs to pay for excess testing! 
 

hard hat on- yes I know the repercussions 

Yes, but no.

50% capacity puts clubs half way to where they were pre-COVID, for many that was losing money. This is an extra cost, an important one to fund, but extra. I think the EFL will have to find the money from somewhere. It will be their decision to implement , so I think it will be down to them to find the extra money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ohhhshauntaylor said:

I’m fortunate to have not been personally/directly affected by this awful virus- but the stats show that under 60’s are very safe from this disease. 
open the stadiums up to under 60’s, get revenue to all FL clubs.... win win. 

you wish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ohhhshauntaylor said:

I’m fortunate to have not been personally/directly affected by this awful virus- but the stats show that under 60’s are very safe from this disease. 
open the stadiums up to under 60’s, get revenue to all FL clubs.... win win. 

And then, having all infected each other, they can go back to their under 60s only homes, return to their under 60s only workplaces, pop out to the under 60s only pubs and restaurants - why didn’t anyone think of that....?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid question maybe/probably but why not vaccinate them as a priority group?

Professional football and premiership rugby are considered necessary for mental health of the nation (or at least that was the original reason why it was important to get live sport back).

Surely they could vaccinate every player (not sure what happens if a player does not want it) in a couple of days?

Granted there will still be a period of testing, bubbles etc. but that would reduce over weeks.

I get this would be widely criticised on the priority group front but we are currently heading rapidly towards a complete stop with more and more games postponed and we come back to the original mental health issue why they were so keen to get going in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Meh said:

Stupid question maybe/probably but why not vaccinate them as a priority group?

Professional football and premiership rugby are considered necessary for mental health of the nation (or at least that was the original reason why it was important to get live sport back).

Surely they could vaccinate every player (not sure what happens if a player does not want it) in a couple of days?

Granted there will still be a period of testing, bubbles etc. but that would reduce over weeks.

I get this would be widely criticised on the priority group front but we are currently heading rapidly towards a complete stop with more and more games postponed and we come back to the original mental health issue why they were so keen to get going in the first place.

Whether people think it's stupid or not, it's understandable people ask it. Problem is , priorities.
You would have to do over 70's and underlying illness first, according to figures I've seen that could be March. They are already saying things about supply issues too.
Then over 60's , as we are still in the area of higher threat.
Then you say football, the Gov have already shown they favour "the Arts" as they let them have crowds long before football, even though outside is safer.

I don't see it happening, there would a lot of opposition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Meh said:

Stupid question maybe/probably but why not vaccinate them as a priority group?

Professional football and premiership rugby are considered necessary for mental health of the nation (or at least that was the original reason why it was important to get live sport back).

Surely they could vaccinate every player (not sure what happens if a player does not want it) in a couple of days?

Granted there will still be a period of testing, bubbles etc. but that would reduce over weeks.

I get this would be widely criticised on the priority group front but we are currently heading rapidly towards a complete stop with more and more games postponed and we come back to the original mental health issue why they were so keen to get going in the first place.

I’m not sure it would change much. To date, the only evidence is that the vaccine stops people getting seriously unwell. They are still researching whether people will still transmit the virus, despite having the vaccine.

I would be appalled if footballers got bumped up the list.

There are millions of social care workers on low wages wondering when and how they will get their vaccine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Whether people think it's stupid or not, it's understandable people ask it. Problem is , priorities.
You would have to do over 70's and underlying illness first, according to figures I've seen that could be March. They are already saying things about supply issues too.
Then over 60's , as we are still in the area of higher threat.
Then you say football, the Gov have already shown they favour "the Arts" as they let them have crowds long before football, even though outside is safer.

I don't see it happening, there would a lot of opposition. 

Most prem clubs have already pre purchased the vaccine. Same as the other rich in the UK. If you’ve got the money you can most probably pre purchase it now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird situation for everybody as in terms of maintaining the TV funding all parties are better off doing nothing and games just happen on an ad-hoc basis as this way its nobodies fault as such and no different to postponements for bad weather. From a moral and health standpoint a circuit breaker is probably the best option but given the number of players that seemingly don't care about the restrictions anyway why should the clubs? My gut feel is they'll just carry on and hope for the best

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, City oz said:

Most prem clubs have already pre purchased the vaccine. Same as the other rich in the UK. If you’ve got the money you can most probably pre purchase it now 

Yep, not right IMO, but it's the World we live in. I was going to get into that in my reply, but I was talking about the UK supplies handed out. Not the rich jumping the queue just because they have money. Already seen in the USA, a COVID denier, I think she was a Senator , has already had the Vaccine. I despair sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, italian dave said:

And then, having all infected each other, they can go back to their under 60s only homes, return to their under 60s only workplaces, pop out to the under 60s only pubs and restaurants - why didn’t anyone think of that....?!

No more of a risk than going to the local Tesco that’s been happening for the last 9 months..... I get the reply and I’m not trying to be an di*k etc- was just playing devil’s advocate..... and I assume we would all be sufficiently social distanced in the ground etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

Weird situation for everybody as in terms of maintaining the TV funding all parties are better off doing nothing and games just happen on an ad-hoc basis as this way its nobodies fault as such and no different to postponements for bad weather. From a moral and health standpoint a circuit breaker is probably the best option but given the number of players that seemingly don't care about the restrictions anyway why should the clubs? My gut feel is they'll just carry on and hope for the best

That is a massive point. Why have a circuit breaker if it could mean the players get bored and go to parties, Llamella, Milivojevic and Aleksandar Mitrovic. Or visit their girlfriend , Kyle Walker. Lockdown/circuit break whatever, not sure it would make a difference to those who break the rules, they'll still do what they want to do regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Yep, not right IMO, but it's the World we live in. I was going to get into that in my reply, but I was talking about the UK supplies handed out. Not the rich jumping the queue just because they have money. Already seen in the USA, a COVID denier, I think she was a Senator , has already had the Vaccine. I despair sometimes.

You will always get the high profile denier. However please do not be ignorant to the fact that multi - millioners, large corporate companies and world wide sporting clubs like the ones in the prem have allready paid and pre ordered the vaccine.

the millions of doses purchased by governments for their respective countries is one purchase but orders by others would also be far more profitable to the manufactures of the vaccine 

the rich ok have jumped the queue but only by their private purchase and most have probably all ready received their dose.  In fact I know of one personally under the oxford trials  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, City oz said:

You will always get the high profile denier. However please do not be ignorant to the fact that multi - millioners, large corporate companies and world wide sporting clubs like the ones in the prem have not allready paid and pre ordered the vaccine.

the millions of doses purchased by governments for their respective countries is one purchase but orders by others would also be far more profitable to the manufactures of the vaccine 

the rich ok have jumped the queue but only by their private purchase and most have probably all ready received their dose.  In fact I know of one personally under the oxford trials  

Oh, I agree and get your point. But in my original reply I was talking about the EFL , Championship to L2. Most of those will struggle to pay for testing, let alone be rich enough to jump queues. I took the original point to mean vaccinate teams from the general populations supply, which IMO, would be out of order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ohhhshauntaylor said:

No more of a risk than going to the local Tesco that’s been happening for the last 9 months..... I get the reply and I’m not trying to be an di*k etc- was just playing devil’s advocate..... and I assume we would all be sufficiently social distanced in the ground etc. 

And if we were all sufficiently distanced..why no over 60s?  Sorry, I do get your point about devils advocate and equally I'm not trying to be a smartass and pick holes: I have no idea what the answer is. 

But I think you can observe looking around the world that the places that have done best the past year have been those whose objective has been to eliminate the virus, not to manage it. And those who've done second best have been those whose objective has been to manage it from a position of strength (ie minimal numbers). Trying to manage it by tweaking a few things here and there (whether that's tier levels or %s in grounds) is what we've tried to do throughout, and we've royally f---d up - and we seem to still be doing in the face of 50,000 new cases every day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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