Selred

9 hours ago, lager loud said:

Is this right? My understanding is that there aren’t any restrictions as such on travelling: gov.uk talks in terms of advising people not to travel and I can’t see anything in the legislation banning travel between tiers or more generally.

Someone who lives in Tier 3 remains subject to the T3 rules if they travel to T1 or T2:

2) No person living in the Tier 3 area may participate in a gathering outside that area which—

(a)consists of two or more people, and

(b)takes place in a private dwelling or in any indoor space.

(from The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (All Tiers) (England) Regulations 2020).

But I think that still leaves someone free to visit a pub in a different tier, alone or with members of their household/bubble.

 I’m not promoting it, by the way: my interest in the travel rules is not to do with going to the pub (or to AG from South Glos) but to work out whether I’m allowed to meet my Leicestershire-based sister outside somewhere to exchange Xmas presents. Whether that’s a reasonable risk is, of course, a different question, which I’m also considering.

Happy to be corrected if someone can show me the rules.

 

If you live in a Tier 3 area, you must continue to follow Tier 3 rules when you travel to a Tier 1 or Tier 2 area. 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-3-very-high-alert#travel

So no you cannot go to the game if you're tier 3, or go to a pub etc. Even if you visit a tier 2 area for other reasons. 

Going to be interesting to see how City do this.

Do they do a ballot of anyone who wants to go, and hope only tier 2 people enter? (Season ticket wise).

Or do they say only people with a Bristol/Bath/N Somerset (tier 2s) address on the system can enter only?

Did a 10k yesterday before work. 1 degree. 

Very sore nipples today as didn't put anything on them!

Would love to do another half marathon next year, I've done Bath and London Landmarks. Would quite like to do one with a trip involved, any recommendations?

On 28/11/2020 at 05:21, City oz said:

There was also an amusing story in the media some years back now where the bloke taking money for parking external to the zoo didn’t actually work for the zoo or the council. The zoo thought he was collecting money for the council and the council thought he was collecting money for the zoo. He must of made thousands over the years.

Sadly a myth, but a terrific story which made I smile.

3 hours ago, MarcusX said:

I still think it’s a twisted message that you can have 1000 people at an indoor venue but not go see 1 friend at their house (or for me, parent) - though I also do fully understand the “covid measures” etc and why it’s deemed safer so not looking to continue that debate.

It all comes down to contact. You're more likely to hug a friend in your house than a stranger at Ashton Gate when you're socially distanced. 

21 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

i suppose not, but its not like those two teams (norwich) need any more advantage...

It could work both ways though. 

Away games will be tricky for them, going from playing with a buzz in their ground to silence.

Just now, TonyTonyTony said:

The question is still the same - is it an unfair advantage?

I think all players would rather some fans in than none.

There's advantages and disadvantages in all things. Should some pubs open and not others, for example. 

I couldn't be unhappy with Bournemouth having fans because we couldn't.

1 hour ago, Masala said:

Marlene on the wall - Suzanne Vega

Photograph - Boyce Avenue 

5 minutes ago, daored said:

Be interesting to see what they do , I guess will have to be in tier 1 or 2 to allow fans back in. But then Downden said restrictions will be tighter post 2 December than they were pre national lockdown. Personally I think it’s lip service , won’t see fans in grounds in two weeks time , which for us would be home to Brum 

Bristol with such high rates wont be one of the first places to allow people into grounds. 

3 minutes ago, Roe said:

Yeah but having them on PPV as opposed to free tv or even paid subscriptions is a bit of a cheek and is rightly getting slated.

I agree, the cost is horrendous. However I don't understand people's right to have the games for free. Even though it's in internationally broadcast, we should we get it free and not people abroad? We are all in lockdowns. 

I also understand football has a lot of money, but don't see people saying Amazon should give prime away for free during lockdown. Business is business.

25 minutes ago, Roe said:

That's a ridiculous question given the amount that the players are still earning now.

Every premier league game is broadcast all around the world, except for in the UK.  The main reason they're not all broadcast here is (presumably) to protect attendances the same reason as no broadcasts at 3pm on a Sat etc.  Given that attendances aren't allowed, they absolutely should be showing all of the games now.

It's a massive difference for the EFL though as obviously we all know it's the other way around with clubs struggling financially even before all of this

Every game is now broadcast, but through PPV I thought?

My main point was around EFL to be fair.

2 minutes ago, CHIPLEY RED said:

The same way it did at the end of last season.

SKY & BT never showed every game so the ones they weren't going to show they could do for free.

As i said it would be a good gesture. 

 

Should the players play for free as well? 

1 hour ago, Masala said:

Seasons in the sun - Terry Jacks

Human - Rag N Bone Man

18 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Sorry probably not explaining it well, rather than cinema chains all but going bust and streaming services becoming the norm to release new films, im suggesting studios take over the existing facilities of cinema chains rather than those chains go unused and out of business completely.

But the reason they are going bust is because of the pandemic plus films being sold to streaming services.

Just sell the films to cinemas first, and then cinemas would survive. Bond should of been the saviour of the cinemas this winter, now they are running dross left over and no-one wants to go.

Just now, Lrrr said:

Yeah but I’m talking about an alternative to streaming rather than being the final nail in the coffin for cinema chains. 

But why not just show it in cinemas rather than set their own up? 

There is no benefit for them to set up their own, it won't be worth the investment. 

The reason isn't the cinemas are taking a %, but streaming services are offering a lot of money.

5 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

yeah but studios only take a portion of ticket sales don’t they? Could be more viable for them if they received everything rather than the cinema chain making money. I can’t see them wanting to put everything out on streaming services even if there’s a charge, look how little Mulan made compared to other Disney remakes of animated films. Being in cinemas is what they want. 

Cinema's arent the profit maker you think they are. It makes much more sense to lease the films to cinema chains who already have the set up, in locations etc.

8 hours ago, Lrrr said:

I’ve still kind of expected a movie studio to experiment with buying a cinema chain and release their films in them. They’d get entire ticket sales and confectionary income, only a couple of screens to account for less films. But could be filmed if 2/3 teamed up, they plan their release dates around the others and could have a cinema filled with release dates year round. 

Isn't that just a normal cinema? I mean most commercial films are only from a handful of studios... 

57 minutes ago, Wanderingred said:

It's the 28th here now in China so I'd like to be the first to wish the gap a very happy 20th birthday.

What's the score of our game tomorrow mate? 

5 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

No Light, No Light - Florence and the Machine

I Believe In A Thing Called Love - The Darkness

If this goes to a streaming service it'll be the final nail in the coffin for cinemas sadly. 

1 hour ago, Mike Hunt-Hertz said:

Teenage Warning...Angelic Upstarts

Danger Zone - Kenny Loggins 

23 hours ago, Baba Yaga said:

Apparently this is the inside of Bill Gate's home, Dr No much? And just to confirm Gates is definitely not a doctor!

Surely thats a picture, not an actual tank, or otherwise has Bill Gates hired the worlds tallest man to scuba diver?

51 minutes ago, Masala said:

Manhattan

Manhatten Transfer - Chanson d'Amour

1 minute ago, Bristol Rob said:

So was I pretty close with my guesstimate of how the process works?

Only asking, just in case I need to retrain! #Politics

If you're going to retrain then I'll say it's so much more complex than that  

Pretty much spot on all joking aside. Just be looking at the total impacts for the sites, but shall be bought in a generic pack rather than paying extra for specific sites. 

6 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

I don't know anything about marketing, but I would guess that most companies use an agency and give them a budget, once the poster has been approved, the agency then places ads where they'll have the biggest impact factor.

Mostly in areas with City fans, but equally areas with few City fans but are on busy enough routes that people will see them, such as Gloucester Road.

Don't imagine the people at the ad agency thought too long and hard about where Rovers play, given the stadiums are sitting dormant.

That's actually my job, I am a media planner. To be fair it would probably of been a generic buy across Bristol with Clear Channel who own the bus advertising space rather than picking specific I expect. 

If there were only a few then I'd of said it was hand picked but it sounds like they are all over Bristol.