scram Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 18 minutes ago, rickygoo said: The initial impetus globally was to play behind closed doors which was never going to work. Football was slow to act but so was the whole of the world just about - especially the British government. Before the first weekend of cancellations I was umming and aahing about going. I was really glad they took the decision out of my hands. That doesn't negate my point - the originall suspending of matches was because too many teams could not compete that weekend Not out of any concern for fans going to games and being at risk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the third man Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 34 minutes ago, rickygoo said: The Johnson press conference telling us to stay home and advising us not to go into pubs etc was a few days .after the Madrid game. It was the weekend before the game, because I usually go to a pub quiz on a Wednesday night and didn't go because of the advice, not the regulations that stopped us, they came into place the Monday after the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the third man Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 46 minutes ago, rickygoo said: You mean they’ll finish the season in front of crowds? No I am saying under the current restrictions you cant play football behind closed doors and once the restrictions are lifted, you can have crowds again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 14 minutes ago, scram said: They are taking legal advice - so will be legions of player lawyers This is not straightforward and the players always have the option to not play My guess is that the law will be in their side too - they signed contracts in good faith and fixed-term contracts are pretty water tight FIFA are not the law And this could be the issue that stymies the plans. If they want to finish because of sporting integrity that could be destroyed by contractual issues - nothing to do with morality or putting lives at risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, the third man said: It was the weekend before the game, because I usually go to a pub quiz on a Wednesday night and didn't go because of the advice, not the regulations that stopped us, they came into place the Monday after the game https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/327fcefe-655c-11ea-a6cd-df28cc3c6a68 This is a news report which dates from after the game suggesting a U-Turn was in the offing. Before that they’d said banning mass gatherings wouldn’t be beneficial. The main advice was to wash hands and stay home if you were sick. It was meant to be a gradual ramp up then all of a sudden - after football games were cancelled - they did a massive gear change with the work from home and stay out of pubs instructions. Edited April 10, 2020 by rickygoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 hour ago, rickygoo said: I think the plans are highly unlikely to come to fruition but a short sharp end of season before restrictions are put back into place might be the only hope for serious football when the current lockdown ends. As for the rest of it you’re making moral and ethical impositions on a sport when it’s simply doing what every other business will be doing - contingency planning. In none one of this has football said it’s more important than any other sector. They’ll play if they can. They won’t if they can’t. And the decision to try and finish this season is no more or less moral than voiding it. If we were top of the Championship we’d have more of a vested interest in finding a way to finish the season. Anyway at the moment it seems that’s what most clubs want to do and you can see why that’s the neatest option. The football authorities are poo. The game is ruined. But I just happen to think that there’s a lot of faux outrage and pomposity about this particular issue. It’s not football that didn’t plan properly for this whole pandemic, run the NHS down, fail to provide sufficient PPE, send out mixed messages, fail to test and contact trace. Just chill - they’ll play when they can. They won’t while they can’t. They really aren’t going to “jeopardise the lives of hundreds of people” any more than the rest of us will be doing when the restrictions end. Inherent risks will remain when we come out of this thing - the legality of having large gatherings will decide whether football with crowds can resume. Fair enough slag them for naivety or wishful thinking but attacking them for uniquely putting peoples lives at risk is only justified if you assume they will break the law or ignore government recommendations. I simply cannot see that happening. With regards to this and especially the type of sentiment in bold, could it be that you have your thoughts on this, and other people have theirs... and that’s perfectly fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy bunny Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 34 minutes ago, rickygoo said: And this could be the issue that stymies the plans. If they want to finish because of sporting integrity that could be destroyed by contractual issues - nothing to do with morality or putting lives at risk. Surely if there is to be sporting integrity the contractual issues simply shouldn't be an issue We both know that won't be the case though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 hour ago, the third man said: No I am saying under the current restrictions you cant play football behind closed doors and once the restrictions are lifted, you can have crowds again Not necessarily its not black or white Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 Football clubs and football authorities thinking about how they might play football...down with this sort of thing. Whatever next...farmers thinking about how to farm; fisherman thinking about how to fish; firemen thinking about how to extinguish fires; milkmen thinking about how to deliver milk; candlestick makers thinking about how to make candles...its just moral bankruptcy. They should be sat at home being really angry about people not sitting at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beswetherick Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 3 hours ago, shandypants said: Pray tell Buy 7 tickets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 33 minutes ago, Sonny said: With regards to this and especially the type of sentiment in bold, could it be that you have your thoughts on this, and other people have theirs... and that’s perfectly fine. It is perfectly fine yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMortimer Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 One or two posters seem to have taken it upon themselves to be contrary and willfully misrepresent some of the objections. I've stated perfectly explicitly that forward planning by the game's authorities is perfectly sensible, practical and necessary if they still hope to complete the season (and I have no problem with that either if it's possible). It's also clear that none of this is going to happen in direct contravention of scientific-led government advice. But the very notion of playing games behind closed doors is a reflection of the inherent health risks involved, even after some of the more extreme measures might start to be relaxed. If there was no risk there would be no need for even considering such a thing. So given the nature of the virus and it's spreading, plus the sheer number of people involved in completing the schedule of the Premier League and Football League (not forgetting accommodation, facilities, equipment and transport etc) makes it all but inevitable that some new cases would be reported. And that's assuming that no supporters show up, which has already been demonstrated to be wishful thinking and would no doubt be amplified by end of season issues. As soon as there are a few infected it's perfectly possible that vulnerable individuals would also be exposed. And why some are more prone to serious symptoms than others is so far largely unknown apart from the factor of age. By it's very definition, that could be risking the lives of an unknown number of people. This leads to an obvious question; how many cases would it take before the entire thing has to be shelved again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoop Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 LMA chief Richard Bevan has come out and criticised Rick Parry about his plans to restart the season, says sending out a letter without talking to clubs first is wrong Im hoping Chansiri and a few other clubs start digging their heels in and make it difficult for the re start to happen when the EFL say so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 38 minutes ago, DJMortimer said: One or two posters seem to have taken it upon themselves to be contrary and willfully misrepresent some of the objections. I've stated perfectly explicitly that forward planning by the game's authorities is perfectly sensible, practical and necessary if they still hope to complete the season (and I have no problem with that either if it's possible). It's also clear that none of this is going to happen in direct contravention of scientific-led government advice. But the very notion of playing games behind closed doors is a reflection of the inherent health risks involved, even after some of the more extreme measures might start to be relaxed. If there was no risk there would be no need for even considering such a thing. So given the nature of the virus and it's spreading, plus the sheer number of people involved in completing the schedule of the Premier League and Football League (not forgetting accommodation, facilities, equipment and transport etc) makes it all but inevitable that some new cases would be reported. And that's assuming that no supporters show up, which has already been demonstrated to be wishful thinking and would no doubt be amplified by end of season issues. As soon as there are a few infected it's perfectly possible that vulnerable individuals would also be exposed. And why some are more prone to serious symptoms than others is so far largely unknown apart from the factor of age. By it's very definition, that could be risking the lives of an unknown number of people. This leads to an obvious question; how many cases would it take before the entire thing has to be shelved again? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 39 minutes ago, DJMortimer said: It's also clear that none of this is going to happen in direct contravention of scientific-led government advice. But the very notion of playing games behind closed doors is a reflection of the inherent health risks involved, even after some of the more extreme measures might start to be relaxed. If there was no risk there would be no need for even considering such a thing. So the government will sanction obviously risky behaviour? Or will football be subject to less stringent rules than the rest of society? And if the government sanctions that behaviour should football be the only sector that goes a step further? You’re saying they won’t play if the Government say they can’t - but if they do play it’ll be inherently dangerous. In which case won’t that be included in the scientific assessment? There are so many variables we have no idea what’s going to happen. There’s a plan - probably a futile one especially if the clubs haven’t signed up to it because the clubs and the players are the key to this - so it’s a matter of wait and see. They’ll play if and when the Government say they can. I’m sure your objections will be amongst the issues considered and evaluated and no sport will be given a pass to override them when the rest of us are blocked from doing things. It bugs me because I think railing against immorality and disrespect for making plans to restart the season is misguided outrage. I genuinely don’t think making these slightly outlandish plans is a big problem - and even if it’s wrong it’s like blaming some drunk Scousers for causing the Hillsborough disaster or the baker for causing the Great Fire of London or Gavrilo Princip for starting World War One. There are bigger targets to be concerned with - poorly Mr Boris Johnson and the people who failed to plan and have underfunded public services for years should be the ones nailed to the cross on this Good Friday not the football authorities - who should have been locked up years ago anyway. Have a lovely Easter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrysgame Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 5 hours ago, Bulgaria said: This is just not going to happen, and rightly so. The season has to be completed. Why does it need to be completed....Why is a sport so important to the country it must be finished..it is a bloody game....plenty of businesses and people's livelihoods will go.. so what is special about football...as for the money it is a drop in the ocean when you look at the economic cost to the UK...can only assume football is putting itself and cash before the population of the country....Not great and totally selfish. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrysgame Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 15 minutes ago, rickygoo said: So the government will sanction obviously risky behaviour? Or will football be subject to less stringent rules than the rest of society? And if the government sanctions that behaviour should football be the only sector that goes a step further? You’re saying they won’t play if the Government say they can’t - but if they do play it’ll be inherently dangerous. In which case won’t that be included in the scientific assessment? There are so many variables we have no idea what’s going to happen. There’s a plan - probably a futile one especially if the clubs haven’t signed up to it because the clubs and the players are the key to this - so it’s a matter of wait and see. They’ll play if and when the Government say they can. I’m sure your objections will be amongst the issues considered and evaluated and no sport will be given a pass to override them when the rest of us are blocked from doing things. It bugs me because I think railing against immorality and disrespect for making plans to restart the season is misguided outrage. I genuinely don’t think making these slightly outlandish plans is a big problem - and even if it’s wrong it’s like blaming some drunk Scousers for causing the Hillsborough disaster or the baker for causing the Great Fire of London or Gavrilo Princip for starting World War One. There are bigger targets to be concerned with - poorly Mr Boris Johnson and the people who failed to plan and have underfunded public services for years should be the ones nailed to the cross on this Good Friday not the football authorities - who should have been locked up years ago anyway. Have a lovely Easter. You've done it now, mentioning Scousers..and Hillsboro on here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 5 minutes ago, Harrysgame said: Why does it need to be completed....Why is a sport so important to the country it must be finished..it is a bloody game....plenty of businesses and people's livelihoods will go.. so what is special about football...as for the money it is a drop in the ocean when you look at the economic cost to the UK...can only assume football is putting itself and cash before the population of the country....Not great and totally selfish. It doesn’t need to be completed. It doesn’t not need to either. It’s simply no big deal in the greater scheme of things. A final decision will be made when it can be. The clubs voted to try and complete it. And that’s a reasonable objective which is in no way putting cash before the health of the population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Harrysgame said: Why does it need to be completed....Why is a sport so important to the country it must be finished..it is a bloody game....plenty of businesses and people's livelihoods will go.. so what is special about football...as for the money it is a drop in the ocean when you look at the economic cost to the UK...can only assume football is putting itself and cash before the population of the country....Not great and totally selfish. The people that run football are thinking about how they might run a football Competition and football clubs in the coming months. It’s not special, it’s not selfish but it is their job to think about it. Hopefully they can, if they can’t they won’t. Edited April 10, 2020 by kobayashi 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbupperthongowl Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 57 minutes ago, Harrysgame said: Why does it need to be completed....Why is a sport so important to the country it must be finished..it is a bloody game....plenty of businesses and people's livelihoods will go.. so what is special about football...as for the money it is a drop in the ocean when you look at the economic cost to the UK...can only assume football is putting itself and cash before the population of the country....Not great and totally selfish. This 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now