Carlisle United

[freezer]

Carlisle United have announced a reduced ground capacity of 9,999.

Therefore, fans will not have to show a Covid Vaccine Passport or a negative lateral flow test. 

Be interesting to see how this pans out. 

[Baba Yaga]

Good on them it's a sensible move for a club in their position, only a fool would think that this policy is going to help stop the spread and there are likely to be big queues outside at kick off time.

However doesn't their ground have terracing and therefore the limit is something like 4,000?

[phantom]

We plan to operate with a revised capacity under the ‘Plan-B’ requirements, as follows:

• Total capacity 9,999
• Standing capacity 3,999
• Seated capacity 6,000

This means we do not expect attendance to make mandatory certification applicable.

At this point, all areas (except Waterworks North End) are planned to remain open. 

At these levels of expected attendance there will be no mandatory Covid certification required at Brunton Park under ‘Plan-B’. 

There will be no requirement to show vaccination status or a recent negative test to enter the stadium and come to games.

Fans should be aware, the limit on terrace places at 3,999 means tickets demand could outstrip supply.  Fans wishing to stand are advised to buy in advance.

Mandatory face coverings

Supporters will not be required to wear a face covering when located in their seat, or on the terrace, in the stadium bowl.

All supporters aged 11 and over will be legally required to wear a face covering when located in all indoor areas of the stadium, other than when eating or drinking, or where exempt. 

Mandatory face-coverings for indoor settings do not extend to hospitality and bar settings in the club. Hence face coverings in Foxy’s, the hospitality boxes, lounges, and the west stand bars are not mandatory. 

Face coverings are required in the East Stand concourse and all other inside areas, such as toilets and entry and exit vomitories.

Face coverings are strongly recommended when brushing past others or moving in or out and around the stadium outside (like queuing to get in).

We will continue to operate our Social distanced area in Section 8 of the Pioneer East stand where fans can sit with more space and face-coverings are mandatory while in your seat.

[Baba Yaga]

Same thing at Cheltenham...

https://www.ctfc.com/news/2021/december/covid-19-update/

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Interesting to see how it plays out. Both of course are highly unlikely to get 10k plus save for big Cup ties, perhaps Cheltenham would have had more chance given League One has some big clubs down there and one off major away followings.

The flipside of course, is that it also will save on some matchday costs of chunks of the ground are now shut in both cases, in grounds that were likely to have seen under 10k anyway most of the time.

Edited December 15, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Swede]

are the sags doing this as well? It would make perfect sense

[glynriley]

7 minutes ago, Swede said:

are the sags doing this as well? It would make perfect sense

Only for the car park I believe.

[Harry]

4 hours ago, Baba Yaga said:

Good on them it's a sensible move for a club in their position, only a fool would think that this policy is going to help stop the spread and there are likely to be big queues outside at kick off time.

However doesn't their ground have terracing and therefore the limit is something like 4,000?

 

2 hours ago, Baba Yaga said:

Same thing at Cheltenham...

https://www.ctfc.com/news/2021/december/covid-19-update/

 

Yep.  The rules only apply if the attendance is over 10k as opposed to the capacity being over 10k. 
Carlisle’s capacity is about 17,900 but they have a large amount of terrace. 
They won’t get over 10k attendance but they are getting average of about 5k. So they’ve restricted the terrace capacity to not fall foul of the 4K standing rule. 
 

With Cheltenham, their capacity is below 10k in total and they have less than 4K standing capacity, so the rules won’t apply to them full stop. 

[phantom]

of course being devils advocate these clubs are now finding ways around regulations.

Are they actually helping their supporters by not having this extra safety measure in place?

Will be interesting if mass positive results pop up as a result

[spudski]

It's such bollox... government guidelines are bollox, as are the Club's statements above.

What's the point of making face coverings mandatory outside and inside the ground...but not mandatory inside  hospitality wtf

Seriously does anyone not question all these guidelines. 

[MarcusX]

7 minutes ago, spudski said:

It's such bollox... government guidelines are bollox, as are the Club's statements above.

What's the point of making face coverings mandatory outside and inside the ground...but not mandatory inside  hospitality wtf

Seriously does anyone not question all these guidelines. 

Yep, we might not align on all views on this but the guidelines will make very little impact generally.

I think they should have kept the test requirement, even if it means some may fake it. It gives a little bit more reassurance

[Curr Avon]

14 minutes ago, spudski said:

It's such bollox... government guidelines are bollox, as are the Club's statements above.

What's the point of making face coverings mandatory outside and inside the ground...but not mandatory inside  hospitality wtf

Seriously does anyone not question all these guidelines. 

Yes, and with the infection rate doubling every two days, further restrictions seem inevitable. 

[phantom]

23 minutes ago, spudski said:

It's such bollox... government guidelines are bollox, as are the Club's statements above.

What's the point of making face coverings mandatory outside and inside the ground...but not mandatory inside  hospitality wtf

Seriously does anyone not question all these guidelines. 

Yeah we have many threads already discussing this and yet another one closed yesterday due to people taking the thread off topic 

[spudski]

6 minutes ago, Curr Avon said:

Yes, and with the infection rate doubling every two days, further restrictions seem inevitable. 

As long as not massive hospitalisations I don't see the point of more restrictions. It's said to be more contagious, but less viscous. Fingers crossed it stays that way. Maybe getting it and having few symptoms, and gaining antibodies will be more effective.

[spudski]

2 minutes ago, phantom said:

Yeah we have many threads already discussing this and yet another one closed yesterday due to people taking the thread off topic 

Serious question...is it mandatory to keep threads on topic? 

I've always viewed threads as conversations that meandor as in real life.

Not being funny...just interested.

[1960maaan]

5 hours ago, Swede said:

are the sags doing this as well? It would make perfect sense

They can only dream of being involved with regulations for big crowds 

[Major Isewater]

26 minutes ago, spudski said:

Serious question...is it mandatory to keep threads on topic? 

I've always viewed threads as conversations that meandor as in real life.

Not being funny...just interested.

I pretty much view any thread that I start as being like my child. It is of me but not my property. I have no control as to how it’s going to turn out. 

[Harry]

42 minutes ago, spudski said:

Serious question...is it mandatory to keep threads on topic? 

I've always viewed threads as conversations that meandor as in real life.

Not being funny...just interested.

I’d be interested to know if a single thread ever stayed ON topic!! 

[PHILINFRANCE]

46 minutes ago, spudski said:

Serious question...is it mandatory to keep threads on topic? 

I've always viewed threads as conversations that meandor as in real life.

Not being funny...just interested.

I share your view and am sure keeping threads on topic is not mandatory; I hope not, as I am probably one of the biggest culprits for deviation from the original topic.

A propos yesterday's COVID thread, I am not sure the thread going off topic was the underlying reason it was locked, rather the gratuitous insults.

[Laner]

1 hour ago, phantom said:

of course being devils advocate these clubs are now finding ways around regulations.

Are they actually helping their supporters by not having this extra safety measure in place?

Will be interesting if mass positive results pop up as a result

But they're not finding loopholes. The government guidelines state "attendance" not "capacity".

[Harry]

2 hours ago, phantom said:

of course being devils advocate these clubs are now finding ways around regulations.

Are they actually helping their supporters by not having this extra safety measure in place?

Will be interesting if mass positive results pop up as a result

 

30 minutes ago, Laner said:

But they're not finding loopholes. The government guidelines state "attendance" not "capacity".

Exactly Laner. 
Carlisle didn’t actually have to do or say anything. So long as they weren’t expecting to double their attendance this week, they can operate perfectly within the rules without having had to announce anything. 
 

Same with Cheltenham. They didn’t even need to make a press release. Their capacity is below 10k. So neither is “finding their way around regulations” 

The only people I’ve seen trying to find loopholes are those who’ve commented earlier on this thread that they could just fake an LFT. That’s what you call exploiting a loophole and quite frankly makes a mockery of the whole thing. 

[1960maaan]

52 minutes ago, Harry said:

I’d be interested to know if a single thread ever stayed ON topic!! 

Some of NTTDS threads do, I think, I mean I'm not sure what the topic is a lot of the time, so .......

[Rocking Red Cyril]

3 hours ago, Harry said:

I’d be interested to know if a single thread ever stayed ON topic!! 

What's a topic

[wendyredredrobin]

I'm sure I read earlier that the 10k limit for open air events was now reduced to 4k.

[Ronnie Sinclair]

1 hour ago, Rocking Red Cyril said:

What's a topic

[bpexile]

13 hours ago, phantom said:

 

Face coverings are required in the East Stand concourse and all other inside areas, such as toilets and entry and exit vomitories.

Hate that term, does that make WC's the Vomitoriums

Edited December 16, 2021 by bpexile

[MarcusX]

7 hours ago, phantom said:

Yeah we have many threads already discussing this and yet another one closed yesterday due to people taking the thread off topic 

It's on topic though, the thread is about the vaccine passport and that is what @spudski was discussing.

I know some messages become heated and maybe even abusive but I don't understand the constant urge to close down discussion of Covid. It's a massive issue affecting us all and potentially the sport. The topics are clearly hotly debated so as much as it may go "off-topic" it's obviously popular and people want to discuss it. The posts are accurately named in their subject (well except this one!) so anyone who wants to avoid it can do - just like many people avoid the Rovers thread.

[phantom]

8 hours ago, spudski said:

Serious question...is it mandatory to keep threads on topic? 

I've always viewed threads as conversations that meandor as in real life.

Not being funny...just interested.

Personally I would say not, but we do have an ongoing problem where topics frequently move a long way off topic and onto something that is already being discussed. 

[phantom]

48 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

It's on topic though, the thread is about the vaccine passport and that is what @spudski was discussing.

I know some messages become heated and maybe even abusive but I don't understand the constant urge to close down discussion of Covid. It's a massive issue affecting us all and potentially the sport. The topics are clearly hotly debated so as much as it may go "off-topic" it's obviously popular and people want to discuss it. The posts are accurately named in their subject (well except this one!) so anyone who wants to avoid it can do - just like many people avoid the Rovers thread.

It's quite simple, this thread is clearly discussing Carlisle and didn't need to go into detail about covid again, we've numerous threads already within this forum where this is being discussed. 

[phantom]

7 hours ago, Harry said:

I’d be interested to know if a single thread ever stayed ON topic!! 

My point is proven by the number of threads that go into a discussion that is already being discussed in another thread.