October 1st touted as the first date back for football fans

[Guest]

How anyone thinks it’s owt other than a 2 fingered salute to the traditional hard working , paying Football Fan is absolutely beyond me 

 

The whole game reeks, from top to bottom 

[DJMortimer]

40 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

AFAIK, planes replace 50% of the air in the cabin, drawn in from outside, every few minutes, through HEPA filters. I'm not sure if these can block the virus, but it's not the same air being recirclutated. However, if the filters can't take out the virus, then again it's a huge risk being on a plane, with just one person infected.

 

Yeah, I worded that rather clumsily. If the air was entirely sealed and recirculated the passengers would slowly all be starved of oxygen, which probably isn't a good thing.

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by DJMortimer

[ChapSmurf]

1 hour ago, sherlyegg said:

I once got flu in the summer, never before have I had flu in the summer or since.

Anyhow a couple of days after I got back off my hols had to go to docs, felt real shyte...

He said 90% certain I caught it on the plane..

 

 

Quite possibly. But it will be through direct contact with someone infected, rather than via the air system.

[ChapSmurf]

49 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Yeah, I worded that rather clumsily. If the air was entirely sealed and recirculated the passengers would slowly all be starved of oxygen, which probably isn't a good thing.

 

 

It guess it depends on who is being starved of said oxygen

[scram]

2 hours ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

300? Wow, that does surprise me somewhat, but at the same time it's not that far fetched. And if that is the case, and the R figure - the figure of virus transmission between people - is 0.5, that still means that if one person there was positive, 150 could be infected. I'm sure there would be tests to make sure people weren't positive, but even so. I wouldn't risk it.

 

 

There are no reliable tests currently

 

There are tests that say you do not have the disease at the point of testing - but you may contract it later that same day. So serial testing is necessary. Currently i believe the PL are advocating every player and staff member gets tested every other day when training resumes

 

Even antibody testing cannot be assumed reliable as there is uncertainty as to whether the virus can be contracted more than once - or indeed, if there are mutations

 

They have to be very careful to rush back to getting games back on

 

Not everybody will be a healthy fit young footballer in the matchday environment - and even then there are quite a few players in professional football that have the same underlying health issues that seem to be the cause of fatality in the general population

[ChapSmurf]

13 minutes ago, scram said:

 

 

There are no reliable tests currently

 

There are tests that say you do not have the disease at the point of testing - but you may contract it later that same day. So serial testing is necessary. Currently i believe the PL are advocating every player and staff member gets tested every other day when training resumes

 

Even antibody testing cannot be assumed reliable as there is uncertainty as to whether the virus can be contracted more than once - or indeed, if there are mutations

 

They have to be very careful to rush back to getting games back on

 

Not everybody will be a healthy fit young footballer in the matchday environment - and even then there are quite a few players in professional football that have the same underlying health issues that seem to be the cause of fatality in the general population

 

You are right. I should have said that in the coming months, I would hope there is a reliable test that can do this. I appreciate there isn't one currently.

 

I've been meaning to ask you a question for a good number of months. Did you, or do you, have anything to do with the professional game?

 

Edit - Feel free to decline to answer btw.

Edited April 25, 2020 by ChapSmurf

[WalthamOwl]

Personally think it’s a bit worrying it sounds like the powers that be are going to be rushing to get sport started up again within weeks. 

[Guest The Horse]

From the Ryanair website.

I presume it's the same for most airlines:

 

Our fleet is fitted with extremely efficient HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Arrestors) filters, which remove particles in the air, down to the size of microscopic bacteria and virus clusters (with an efficiency of better than 99.99%).

 

https://www.ryanair.com/ie/en/useful-info/disruptions-and-refunds/coronavirus-covid-19

Edited April 25, 2020 by The Horse

[owlsdreamer]

On 24/04/2020 at 19:57, trev said:

Soooo Oxford boffins who are 80% confident they have a vaccine for covid-19 have said they would like it to be ready September.

 

Maybe.

 

If everything goes perfect (that was their words).

 

They hope to have a couple of million doses ready for then to give to the most vulnerable and key workers.

 

They say it could take 12-18 months longer to get the mass numbers needed to vaccinate everyone.

 

But football thinks huge crowds may be able to attend matches sat 3cm apart from Oct??? 

 

Absolutely baffling. I think the word Optimistic is a huge understatement.

 

Oct 2021...maybe.

Perhaps the EFL thing their so important that they expect the government to give all the available doses of a vaccine to season ticket holders before anyone else.

[owlsdreamer]

18 hours ago, WalthamOwl said:

Personally think it’s a bit worrying it sounds like the powers that be are going to be rushing to get sport started up again within weeks. 

It appears o me that their own personal agenda of getting things up and running again over ride fans safety.

typical of the modern game.

Until this is all over, football means NOTHING.

Edited April 26, 2020 by owlsdreamer

[trev]

34 minutes ago, owlsdreamer said:

It appears o me that their own personal agenda of getting things up and running again over ride fans safety.

typical of the modern game.

Until this is all over, football means NOTHING.

They are doing it by claiming it's for the good of country too.

 

Saying sport is vital to mental wellbeing and it will give the country a lift blah blah blah.

 

Yeah sure, we all want to watch millionaires run about in an empty stadium against their will. 

 

That will really perk us up.

 

Idiots.

[NorthernOwl]

On 25/04/2020 at 12:08, Royal_D said:

There’s not a single aspect of playing games behind closed doors that complies with social distancing

 

And asking clubs to operate playing games behind closed doors , does not , can not , and won’t work financially for the majority of the EFL that arnt been funded by stinking rich owners 

 

The EFL is supposed to be about protecting the integrity of the sport,   What’s gonna happen to the league one/two clubs that can’t survive with no fans through gates ?  Screw them if they can’t afford to sing to the tune of the desperate footballing authorities that are only concerned about £££££

 

So you think playing no games at all is somehow better for clubs financially? 

 

Streaming games will bring in some money. Playing no games will mean zero income.

 

Lots of clubs futures are at stake here. Those not wanting behind closed doors games may not have a club to come back to.

[Maddogbob]

7 minutes ago, NorthernOwl said:

 

So you think playing no games at all is somehow better for clubs financially? 

 

Streaming games will bring in some money. Playing no games will mean zero income.

 

Lots of clubs futures are at stake here. Those not wanting behind closed doors games may not have a club to come back to.

End it now clubs will have prize money. That should cover wages for the players. Those out of contract can then be released. 

 

Meny clubs can't afford to run games without fans coming through the door. 

 

 

[the third man]

Streaming games will income for the few, at the risk to all players and everyone else involved

 

income problems could be solved now if the PL let some of the money cascade down, or have they already spent it / borrowed against it and that's they are so desperate so they don't have to pay the TV companies back

 

The HSW act says everyone should have a Safe & Healthy working environment and that companies have to show a duty of care to everyone on their premises, or does it stop when there is money involved

[trev]

29 minutes ago, the third man said:

Streaming games will income for the few, at the risk to all players and everyone else involved

 

income problems could be solved now if the PL let some of the money cascade down, or have they already spent it / borrowed against it and that's they are so desperate so they don't have to pay the TV companies back

 

The HSW act says everyone should have a Safe & Healthy working environment and that companies have to show a duty of care to everyone on their premises, or does it stop when there is money involved

I'm sure the tv companies and premier league/EFL could come up with some sort of repayment package or future reductions in tv revenue to allow for these possible problems?

 

I'm sure the tv companies don't want the club's to go bust either...otherwise no footy for them to show.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, NorthernOwl said:

 

So you think playing no games at all is somehow better for clubs financially? 

 

At this level , yes , absolutely 

 

Behind closed doors games do not go ahead without cost , and clubs at this level cannot operate without fans coming through the turnstiles 

[Musn't Grumble]

One obvious reason why "behind closed doors" as early as this October won't work...

 

Here's the scenario. Team A plays Team B on the Saturday. On the following Monday, a player from Team A reports in sick with COVID-19 symptoms. So that's the playing staff of Team A, the playing staff of Team B, the coaching staff, the match officials and the staff required to put the game on... all quarantined for at least the next two weeks. Fixtures postponed again.

 

Additionally (as happened in Spain, I think), fans were meeting up outside the ground with their radios. I don't think we'll have a problem with thousands of fans gathering under the South Stand but the top PL clubs must surely see this as a potential hotspot for virus transmission.

 

Finally, will FIFA change the laws of the game to accommodate players keeping the statutory two metres apart during games...especially as this applies currently to every other workplace unless you have PPE?

 

(PS Come to think of it, everyone not being allowed within two metres of other players could be the making of Pelupessy)

[Nut]

27 minutes ago, Musn't Grumble said:

One obvious reason why "behind closed doors" as early as this October won't work...

 

Here's the scenario. Team A plays Team B on the Saturday. On the following Monday, a player from Team A reports in sick with COVID-19 symptoms. So that's the playing staff of Team A, the playing staff of Team B, the coaching staff, the match officials and the staff required to put the game on... all quarantined for at least the next two weeks. Fixtures postponed again.

 

Additionally (as happened in Spain, I think), fans were meeting up outside the ground with their radios. I don't think we'll have a problem with thousands of fans gathering under the South Stand but the top PL clubs must surely see this as a potential hotspot for virus transmission.

 

Finally, will FIFA change the laws of the game to accommodate players keeping the statutory two metres apart during games...especially as this applies currently to every other workplace unless you have PPE?

 

(PS Come to think of it, everyone not being allowed within two metres of other players could be the making of Pelupessy)

Also, teams often stay in a local hotel the night before a game which obviously can't happen at the moment. Not the end of the world if two teams playing each other are fairly local but what if Bournemouth or Southampton are playing Newcastle? No way will they have a 5 or 6 hour coach journey, play a game then travel 5 or 6 hours home. They'd probably expect the hotels to open just for them and only be staffed by people who are clear of infection. 

[Nut]

16 hours ago, trev said:

I'm sure the tv companies and premier league/EFL could come up with some sort of repayment package or future reductions in tv revenue to allow for these possible problems?

 

I'm sure the tv companies don't want the club's to go bust either...otherwise no footy for them to show.

It would be easy for the tv compamies to reduce payments over the term of their contract to cover any losses from this season or next. 

[gurujuan]

I see the French League will now not reopen. They have followed guidance from their government, that no more sporting events can take place this year We need similar guidance from our government, to stop all this nonsense talk about finishing the season As usual though, our government is sending mixed messages, suggesting that social distancing may have to remain in place until the new year, and yet allowing the football authorities to make up their own rules.