Chappers

In the current climate, the club would be wise not to sell tickets to supporters in Tier 3, simply as they have to be seen to be complying with current rules, and failure to do so could mean added restrictions in future. Remember, you can cram into Cribbs Causeway safely, but socially distanced football supporting is dangerous.

2 minutes ago, The Bard said:

Is seating vs terracing part of it?

 

No, it was just BANES being useless. From what I read, it should have been a formality, but BANES wanted an inspection, and could not do it quickly. It wasn’t as if they didn’t realise there was a 50% chance of an FA Trophy game on that date. Sounds like they may not even have fans for Saturday.

9 minutes ago, RUSSEL85 said:

Why not? I’m classed as a key worker but it pales in to insignificance compared to what the doctors, nurses have done. Plus i only said “Maybe”, thought opinions were allowed on a forum, you have every right to disagree. 

Well I do disagree, it smacks of bandwagon jumping. Personally I’d like priority for those fans who have trekked around the Country for years, but that would not be fair as it would end up with the same fans at each game. 
Looks like it could be first come first served, probably be in lockdown by Pompey!

4 minutes ago, RUSSEL85 said:

Maybe offer to nhs staff season tickets holders first then ballot the rest.

Why???? Shop workers? Teachers? But why????

54 minutes ago, pillred said:

I'm not sure what you mean by fully tested, 100s of thousands of people have taken part in trials all over the world and there have been practically no adverse effects and most of the ones passed as safe are over 90% effective, yes it may have been a lot quicker than is normal but that does not mean it's not fully tested. As far as the long term is concerned nobody knows what the side effects may be, but anybody over 65 that doesn't have the vaccine is playing Russian roulette with their life and I for one will seize the chance when it is offered to me.

I’m not some mad anti-vaxer, just stating that trials have been limited compared to other vaccines, and that there will be unknowns, as we don’t really know how the virus will mutate, and we aren’t really sure how long immunity you get. 
Definitely right to proceed, but until it’s been up and running for a while, we won’t really know if it’s a magic bullet, or damage limitation (As with her flu vaccine, which doesn’t protect against all variants). I just prefer cautious optimism, and fully expect about another 18 months, at least, before full ‘normality’.

On 10/12/2020 at 12:07, Super said:

Oliver Dowden saying that he hopes we can have full stadiums by next Autumn.

Flaws, Oliver Dowden in clueless. The vaccine is not fully tested, and efficiency in a her immunity programme not fully known. The virus may mutate, could be good or bad. Hancock will be involved in organising vaccination programme. Johnson is Prime Oaf!

Much as I’d like to be positive, the above don’t give me much confidence.

One of the highlights of 42 years of watching City, after such a bad time, the Club was on its way back. 37 years ago, and how long is it since we played them in the League? About half of that time.

58 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Bozo already basically saying that unless everyone behaves then another lockdown could be imposed in the new year

Blaming the public for his total incompetence and many failures

I’m quite happy to go back as soon as permitted, think I have enough sense to avoid problems and stay safe.

I just can’t work out the logic of a Centrally determined local lockdown, seems something that should be locally determined. Then you hear that Tory MP’s are demanding that their areas are in a low tier, what’s the point of science, if it’s all determined by political allegiance and shoutiness?

Sounds like very random figures based on zero logic... So pretty consistent with everything the Prime Oaf has done to date.

Sounds familiar.... McIndoe?

11 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

What a complete bufoon

Personally , Id like to see you and your 7 family members transferred to a assigned enclosed area / town where you can ignore the harmless CoVid and behave how you wish , with other like minded and selfish tyoes

No NHS facilities - you get on with it , catch it , on your own

Sadly, the attitude expressed is one reason why the Government are delaying, that, plus the fact that they have not yet learnt that there is a massive difference between National League and Premiership.

There is no logical reason why limited attendances could not attend outdoor sporting fixtures, it’s really just a mix of ignorance, prejudice, incompetence and lack of Tory donors in football that are delaying things. 

2 hours ago, Super said:

Lockdown for a month just to save xmas?

Yup, then another lockdown late January because Christmas spread the virus. At some point, somebody might realise that large indoor gatherings, with lots of contact are not a good idea right now. Sadly, the virus will not take a Christmas holiday.

2 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

Agree 

Politics is nothing to do with it

Id love to see some of the critics in charge

Massive pressure from every angle , everyone with a different want and agenda

Lives v the collapse of the economy and numerous other significant effects on the functionality of life

Hundreds of difficult decisions to be made every day

Not sure how much more difficult it could be for any government tbh

Just a few thoughts, maybe use people who know what they are doing for T&T, similar for PPE procurement, maybe use companies with experience rather than dodgy mates. Watch and learn from Europe. Be pro-active. Clear and consistent messaging. Oh, and the other small suggestion, actually have a plan of some sort. Oh yes, and a competent team to manage things rather than just clueless numpties doing Cummings bidding.
 

26 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

It's what happens after they go through the turnstile that's the problem.

If fans already are unable to sit down in the seats they've been allocated, keep safety exits clear, refrain from smoking inside stadia or wash their hands after visiting the bog, what chance do you think there is of them keeping to severe rules that would be required to keep punters safe? Folks have already shared on here advice as to control flows post Covid in stadia and that requires timed ingress & egress. We've plenty of punters who can't do 90 mins as is, so clearly they'll be happy to hang around for an hour post  a drab match, won't they?

Take the positive view, there are many that can behave, you can identify who is sitting in which seat, we will probably have more ST’s than available seats... If people transgress, don’t invite them back until the crisis has eased.

4 hours ago, Dredd said:

It’s ridiculous there has to be some way now to get a small % of people into stadiums. I’m sure clubs don’t care if it’s 500 people at this point, that’s 500 refunds they don’t have to give. 
Be as militant as you like about the rules, masks during games, 5 seats between people, allocated entry/exit points, but start drip feeding people in. 
If I can go to a pub, cinema, restaurant indoors with 2m distancing then football should be less of a risk. 

Simple fact is that the virus is likely to be around for some time, so we have to work out a way to live with it, balancing risk and economy. The focus should be on what we CAN do safely. Science seems to suggest that risk of transmission outdoors is much lower, so let’s look at how it can be done safely. All very well to be risk averse, but mental well-being is important, and damage to mental health could do a lot more damage than the virus.

3 hours ago, MarcusX said:

What spoons is open 23 hours a day?
I still think your ignoring the very basic point of the message.

The message is "we're socialising too much and we need to tighten up". There are parts of the UK that aren't allowed to mix with other households indoors. We are no longer at the stage of "how can we open up safely" like when these trials started and fans started going in. We are at the stage of "we must slow down NOW to avoid a full restriction again".

You cannot send out that message by allowing crowds into sporting events, or music venues or anything else that hasn't already been opened up. I'm expecting "park" level football to be restricted next as I can't see how 30+ of us can play football all over the country tomorrow whilst adhering to the message because aside from the football it's everything that goes with it. The car sharing to get there and back and the heading into the pub for a drink after are two immediate things that spring to mind.

We can talk about other countries but as I pointed out earlier, France are backtracking on numbers in some places. We've also managed the whole virus differently to other countries. Places that have handled the whole situation better are in a better position than us to open up - as above, we aren't opening up right now we are closing down again.

Only people being facetious or just simple think it only operates between hours of 10 and 6. I dont think there's any clear science about the time but its quite obvious to most that closing bars earlier will lead to some of the following:

- less people going out as some will deem it not worth it.
- less time available for people to drink upto 4 hours for some venus.
- the usual kick-out shenanigans that happen at 1/2am and cause Police issues will now happen earlier

It's not perfect but it's a time that allows people to still go out, and particularly have a meal, but without getting stupid(er) like people do in the early hours. Of course people will likely head back to houses instead of just going home, but something had to be done short of closing them completely.

As above, there's some logic to it even if it's far from perfect. Shouldnt make social distancing any more difficult because bars and restaurants wont allow any more people in than their limit

I can’t spell 13 and totally disagree with you. Goodbye

28 minutes ago, The Humble Realist said:

I wonder if an unspoken reason is that police and paramedics will be needed to reopen all grounds but in 6 weeks time these same staff may be needed in hospitals etc ?

 

Possible, but why it needs looking at separately for each of the levels, to work out what CAN be done and what restrictions will need to apply.A lot of National League side will struggle to stage FA Cup games without fans, and I think the League is being suspended, as they just cannot afford to stage the games. 
If only football donated money to the Tory party, or Cummings was a fan... Solutions would soon be found.

There has to be a realistic review of this, as there is a massive difference between Conference North and South and Man Utd. In a Country where 23 hours in Spoons is allowed, but a number of socially distanced fans in open air are not permitted, something

must be wrong. Europe seems to be managing it well, and protecting sporting clubs should be important. We seem to be falling for the Government BS blame shifting and trying to punish ourselves. Sorry, let’s have leadership, consistent messaging, taking it seriously, trying to balance the various needs, proper planning, not just making it up as they go along. Maybe even see what scientist say.

46 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I haven’t missed the point and I’ve noted reasons why, so it’s incorrect to say there is “absolute no” reason just because you don’t agree with them.

We’re tightening up on restrictions, it would completely go against the message to start letting hundreds or even thousands of people into sporting events.

I’ve just lost the point of your argument, how it relates to small attendances at a fairly low level (Saving clubs), and why that’s so wrong when more risky activities are permitted. The science I read suggests that virus infection outdoors is low risk, and social distancing at Twerton Park is hardly difficult.

1 minute ago, Super said:

Germany probably have a testing system that works.

I think what really annoyed me was Gove, stating that he had seen Arsenal fans, so knew all about football. The break point should be questioned, what level can be played safely, what crowd limit balances business v risk, what does the science say, could it be done with ST holders only? Actually try and make it happen, safely.

49 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I can see this causing unfairness across the levels. Teams vying for promotion/relegation into national leagues where half the teams have had crowds and income? Teams within the same league where some of them have income and others dont? Doesn't seem a fair scenario to me.

See Merthyr Town situation announced before this latest news. They've had to pull out of the league due to the latest restrictions in Wales meaning they were the only club at step 3 not allowed to play infront of their crowd.

 

 

I'd hardly call it "perfectly" safe and manageable. No system that relies on the compliance of the general public will be perfectly safe.

At a time when the government are telling people they are socialising too much you can't then go and have crowds back at sporting events. It's not just the game it's the whole culture, in the pub before and after, mixing with other groups around the ground, some will travel to away games and try and get in/get tickets.

Not sure of the comparison with Spoons, if you're sat in a pub you should be sat at a table with your group only and not mixing with anyone else?

Think you’ve massively missed the point, you can’t have large crowds, but you have to look at L1, L2 and particularly, National League. There is absolutely no reason why you cannot have limited attendances at that level, a whole lot safer than sitting in a pub, no mask, and closer contact. And indoors where the virus spreads a lot more. 

Germany seems to manage well. 

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

To be fair, the one thing amongst his word salad that Gove said was sensible was that it wasn’t about necessarily the watching of the game, it was the crowds in the concourses and tubes/buses etc at pinch points like half time etc.

Its also worth saying that some teams have turned down the pilot events because they would lose money if less  than x fans came in.

If I take the blue few, the Memorial isn’t really set up to allow a good flow for exit/entrance without pinch points so even on a small attendance, there is some logic. Even at Yate Town the other night, total social distance inside but at exit it was a bit of a slow crowd shuffle.

Its a problem that has to be solved, or the consequences in the lower leagues will be dire, but there is at least a modicum of logic

I can understand some of the logic, it just seems a blanket decision affecting clubs with attendances varying from 200 to 50k+. Gove wittered about Premiership, ignoring the fact that 5 of the 7 levels are totally different. A competent and focussed Government would approach sport with a far more positive approach, engaging and trying to support Clubs with policy appropriate for each individual level.

I thought that for the first time, this Government might actually be sensible, and realise that restricted attendances at League One and below will be perfectly safe and manageable, and keep the clubs afloat. Championship may be a bit more difficult, but should be achievable, albeit with a low percentage.

I just find it odd that I can’t watch Bath City safely in a socially distanced manner, in a crowd of <1,000, but could drink from 7am to 10pm in a Wetherspoons.

2 minutes ago, phantom said:

Just clarifying the point you made

No worries, all very vague right now. On the BBC Sport site