Deadline For Decision on This Season..

[Essix Blue]

3 hours ago, rickygoo said:

Thee is no perfect solution. 

And Dresden in the German league now have to isolate for 14 days because a couple of players tested positive. 
 

They’re due to restart next week. 
 

Just cancel the whole lot ffs 

[Essix Blue]

59 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

The Bundesliga is much trumpeted as the way forward for fan involvement but they were saying insolvency beckoned if games didn’t restart. 

Well. It was. Maybe not now....

[Dick_Turpin]

14 minutes ago, Essix Blue said:

And Dresden in the German league now have to isolate for 14 days because a couple of players tested positive. 
 

They’re due to restart next week. 
 

Just cancel the whole lot ffs 

I think that’s what will ultimately happen - the Germans will probably confirm how unworkable the play on solutions are. But the legal hurdles make an attempt worthwhile. 

[the third man]

Some German states / cities are now re-introducing lockdown because of a spike in new cases

[Mystic Neg]

3 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Numerous football leagues around the world have taken this decision. Were they in favour of that solution because it suited Wednesday? Obviously there are plenty that believe it is an acceptable option without it being a matter of favouritism.

 

Clearly the best solution would be to complete the season if practically possible, but with the contracts situation and the time available for next season that is becoming increasingly untenable as squads like ours, and no doubt plenty of others, will be absolutely ravaged come the end of June. It seems to me that the health risks and implications are still largely unknown and that football leagues are being unduly hurried by considerations that are almost entirely financial and self-serving.

 

What we can all agree on is that the game's authorities have been landed in the middle of a monumental minefield. And there is simply no way out of it without having some of the mines going off. I don't envy those responsible for ultimately making the decisions as the ramifications could last for years, no matter what they do.

 

 

 

 

 

Fair enough but I think you've missed my point, in this forums case the majority are claiming voiding is the fairest solution because it suits us. My point was that the tune would be very different if we were where Leeds or West Brom are. 

 

 

[Harrysgame]

On 07/05/2020 at 13:56, Steve Down South said:

I suspect that means the Premier League will re-start next month.  Only question might be around whether relegation would be off the table, which could in turn impact any plans for resumption of Championship.

Thing is just look how the Germans have handled things. They have 6 times fewer deaths than us and a population who can follow guidelines and are far more socially aware.

Would love to see football back but without the fans it is a bit pointless.

Seems some clubs and players have reservation about playing, due to safety so would expect the PL will do all they can put out lots of positive PR as the power is with the players and the PFA on this if they don't feel safe then game off.

 

[scram]

1 hour ago, Mystic Neg said:

 

Fair enough but I think you've missed my point, in this forums case the majority are claiming voiding is the fairest solution because it suits us. My point was that the tune would be very different if we were where Leeds or West Brom are. 

 

 

 

No solution is "fair" - but voiding the season is the least worst of the options

 

Concluding the final 25% of the season under considerably different criteria to the preceding 75% is far from fair either

 

And if it rolls over to July when squads could look entirely different then it will be so corrupt it would be indefensible

[Dick_Turpin]

45 minutes ago, scram said:

 

No solution is "fair" - but voiding the season is the least worst of the options

 

Concluding the final 25% of the season under considerably different criteria to the preceding 75% is far from fair either

 

And if it rolls over to July when squads could look entirely different then it will be so corrupt it would be indefensible

I lean towards PPG but 51:49. I don’t think there is a right answer. 

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

I favour players getting their heads together and saying "it aint safe" ! 

[Essix Blue]

3 hours ago, rickygoo said:

I think that’s what will ultimately happen - the Germans will probably confirm how unworkable the play on solutions are. But the legal hurdles make an attempt worthwhile. 

Apparently all they’ve done is postpone Dresdens next 2 games. 
 

I give up 

[Steve Down South]

12 hours ago, Harrysgame said:

Thing is just look how the Germans have handled things. They have 6 times fewer deaths than us and a population who can follow guidelines and are far more socially aware.

Would love to see football back but without the fans it is a bit pointless.

Seems some clubs and players have reservation about playing, due to safety so would expect the PL will do all they can put out lots of positive PR as the power is with the players and the PFA on this if they don't feel safe then game off.

 

As you say, the Germans have managed the whole process very well and are in a much better position with regard to re-starting the Bundesliga.

 

Agree with you that football without fans is pretty pointless, although have to say I’ve missed the game less than I expected.  My thoughts on Premier League starting again next month are more to do with PL determination to avoid loss of TV money, although this might be less likely now after news in papers this morning.  Personally I would declare season void across all leagues and start new season once supporters able to return.

[ChapSmurf]

On 06/05/2020 at 20:28, handworth52 said:

if we are on about safety etc I went to Brentford away went on train used underground went in pubs ,I think at that time in London there were as many positive with covid 19  than there is now ,how many of us have got covid 19 going to that game? probably none or very few , also the last home game how many went to that game and ended up getting covid 19 going to the game? I don't believe that catching a virus in an open air arena is a high risk environment , pubs,tube,buses,supermarkets,shopping centres,schools,gyms etc  those are the places where you are highly at risk . if most of those are opened up can you tell me why is an open aired football stadium is more at risk than those enclosed places where the virus is most prevalent? and airlines whether they are 10% 30% 100% full are by far the most dangerous place to catch virus`s due to reconditioned air from cabin . a lot of nonsense is been spoken and written and sadly the mass panic will cause a complete destruction of the economy ,everyone who has been paid for doing nothing and supping beer in back garden are soon to get a reality check once companies fold like a pack of cards due to mass panic and hysteria. im not for 1 minute saying lets open turnstiles in 3 weeks but what im saying all those other things/places are far more likely that you will catch the virus . either we get things opened up and people need to weigh up there risks to themselves or close family or we end up in a very very serious situation within months where between 5-10 million will be without work and unable to pay there bills and then possibly all hell could break out . 

 

Wrong. It's an urban myth about air quality in modern planes.

 

Studies have shown that a crowded airplane is no more germ-laden than other enclosed spaces—and usually less. Those underfloor filters are described by manufacturers as being of hospital quality. I needn’t be reminded that hospitals are notorious viral incubators, but Boeing says that between 94 and 99.9 percent of airborne microbes are captured, and there’s a total changeover of air every two or three minutes — far more frequently than occurs in offices, movie theaters, or classrooms.

 

The filters they refer to are HEPA filters. Some of the best-rated HEPA units have an efficiency rating of 99.995%, which assures a very high level of protection against airborne disease transmission (taken from here).

 

It's also an urban myth that pilots can alter the amount of fresh air flow to increase fuel efficiency. They have no control over this and it is set by the manufacturer.

 

Your point about open air venues has some weight, until you factor in that viruses will become airborne and land on to objects such as door handles, counter tops, seats etc., survive, and then be transferred to anyone touching that object. As we all touch our face on average 23 times per hour, just turning up at 14:50 and leaving at 16:50 means we could have touched our faces up to 46 times in those two hours. That's 46 opportunites to infect yourself with the virus if you have touched a contaminated surface. Watching Wednesday, I probably cover my eyes about 46 times per half!

 

If just one person out of 25,000 has Covid-19, and inadvertanly contaminates a surface, how many people could we reasonable say will also touch that surface and then their faces? 1, 2, 5, 10, 50? If the effective reproduction number (R) is greater than 1, then all of a sudden the virus will start to spread, and within weeks the country will be back in lockdown and the NHS overwhelmed.

 

That is the simple reason why mass gatherings, whether in enclosed or open-air arenas, will not be currently permitted. IMHO.

[sherlyegg]

 

Typically, half of the air in the passenger cabin is recirculated. You might be told that if that recirculated air is first passed through a high-efficiency filter, then it will be clean. You might also hear that by cleaning the recirculated air and reducing the supply of dry outside air, your airline is doing you a favor. After all, you are getting “clean” air that isn’t as dry as usual. This is partly true, but not quite right.

 

Not all aircraft are equipped with HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filters because filters are not required. Also, filters are only effective if they are regularly inspected and changed.

There are no such regulations in place.   Keep in mind also that even HEPA filters can only trap solid particles; they don’t remove gases (like carbon monoxide and ozone, for example) from the recirculated air.

 

Finally, even if the filter is installed properly and changed regularly, you ideally need a ventilation system that is designed so that the flow of the “supply air” will draw contaminants away from your face and towards the filter (“smart air flow”). Also, the outside air needs to be clean, and you need enough of it to dilute or remove contaminants in the cabin air. Some of these contaminants can be a nuisance, but others can be toxic.

 

https://www.afacwa.org/aircraft_air_quality

[ChapSmurf]

13 minutes ago, sherlyegg said:

 

Typically, half of the air in the passenger cabin is recirculated. You might be told that if that recirculated air is first passed through a high-efficiency filter, then it will be clean. You might also hear that by cleaning the recirculated air and reducing the supply of dry outside air, your airline is doing you a favor. After all, you are getting “clean” air that isn’t as dry as usual. This is partly true, but not quite right.

 

Not all aircraft are equipped with HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filters because filters are not required. Also, filters are only effective if they are regularly inspected and changed.

There are no such regulations in place.   Keep in mind also that even HEPA filters can only trap solid particles; they don’t remove gases (like carbon monoxide and ozone, for example) from the recirculated air.

 

Finally, even if the filter is installed properly and changed regularly, you ideally need a ventilation system that is designed so that the flow of the “supply air” will draw contaminants away from your face and towards the filter (“smart air flow”). Also, the outside air needs to be clean, and you need enough of it to dilute or remove contaminants in the cabin air. Some of these contaminants can be a nuisance, but others can be toxic.

 

https://www.afacwa.org/aircraft_air_quality

 

Not according to IATA. Agreed not all aircraft will be fitted with them, but I would guess 99% of the ones we are likely to fly on, will be.

 

https://www.iata.org/contentassets/f1163430bba94512a583eb6d6b24aa56/cabin-air-quality.pdf

[Essix Blue]

So. 3 Brighton players test positive. 
 

How convenient 

[Bouncing Owl]

1 minute ago, Essix Blue said:

So. 3 Brighton players test positive. 
 

How convenient 

Yep. There will be games being played by lower premier league clubs. Obviously, you need to contract the virus but I can see this re-start been held back then stopping altogether. 

[handworth52]

1 hour ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

Wrong. It's an urban myth about air quality in modern planes.

 

Studies have shown that a crowded airplane is no more germ-laden than other enclosed spaces—and usually less. Those underfloor filters are described by manufacturers as being of hospital quality. I needn’t be reminded that hospitals are notorious viral incubators, but Boeing says that between 94 and 99.9 percent of airborne microbes are captured, and there’s a total changeover of air every two or three minutes — far more frequently than occurs in offices, movie theaters, or classrooms.

 

The filters they refer to are HEPA filters. Some of the best-rated HEPA units have an efficiency rating of 99.995%, which assures a very high level of protection against airborne disease transmission (taken from here).

 

It's also an urban myth that pilots can alter the amount of fresh air flow to increase fuel efficiency. They have no control over this and it is set by the manufacturer.

 

Your point about open air venues has some weight, until you factor in that viruses will become airborne and land on to objects such as door handles, counter tops, seats etc., survive, and then be transferred to anyone touching that object. As we all touch our face on average 23 times per hour, just turning up at 14:50 and leaving at 16:50 means we could have touched our faces up to 46 times in those two hours. That's 46 opportunites to infect yourself with the virus if you have touched a contaminated surface. Watching Wednesday, I probably cover my eyes about 46 times per half!

 

If just one person out of 25,000 has Covid-19, and inadvertanly contaminates a surface, how many people could we reasonable say will also touch that surface and then their faces? 1, 2, 5, 10, 50? If the effective reproduction number (R) is greater than 1, then all of a sudden the virus will start to spread, and within weeks the country will be back in lockdown and the NHS overwhelmed.

 

That is the simple reason why mass gatherings, whether in enclosed or open-air arenas, will not be currently permitted. IMHO.

well if that's true then why did I get a virus 2days after arriving on holiday for about 60% of my last few holidays? its a well known fact that an airplane is a bad place to pick up a virus ,so is any enclosed place. outdoors zero.  as for football matches ive never caught a virus within 3 days of a game and I go to appx 40 games a season . personally I think football grounds/open aired ones are very low risk . tight enclosed concourses yes maybe a risk. closing the whole world down when the risk is almost zero for the under 50s is madness ,the damage this will do to peoples lives ,jobs,unable to pay for the rent/mortgage is going to be incredibly hard. the professor on tv this morning showed the stats for deaths and if people would watch that I think a lot of people would calm down and stop been so anxious about things. life is about risks and weighing up if its worth the risk or not . 2 kids have sadly died out of 10 million and both had very likely conditions ,so chance of sending your child to school and been at risk is zero but parents are mostly terrified about sending there kids back to school. the professor called covid 19 the over 75 disease where you are 10000 times more at risk if your over 90, but you are 1000 times more at risk from other illnesses under 50, this propaganda has to stop its incredibly damaging and I know personally 3 people who have died this past month who have covid 19 put on there death certificate as possible cause of death along with the 2 real reasons while they passed away , they weren't tested for covid 19 either but they will enter the stats of 30000 plus ,why do you think germany has less than 25% deaths even though there population is higher? its how the figures are counted. 

[sherlyegg]

6 minutes ago, handworth52 said:

why do you think germany has less than 25% deaths even though there population is higher? its how the figures are counted. 

Because Germany controlled better than most, it didn't get into the older population as it did in most other countries in the world.

Nearly all countries are doing the exact same as us, however some do it better than others.

[ChapSmurf]

2 hours ago, handworth52 said:

well if that's true then why did I get a virus 2days after arriving on holiday for about 60% of my last few holidays? its a well known fact that an airplane is a bad place to pick up a virus ,so is any enclosed place. outdoors zero.  as for football matches ive never caught a virus within 3 days of a game and I go to appx 40 games a season . personally I think football grounds/open aired ones are very low risk . tight enclosed concourses yes maybe a risk. closing the whole world down when the risk is almost zero for the under 50s is madness ,the damage this will do to peoples lives ,jobs,unable to pay for the rent/mortgage is going to be incredibly hard. the professor on tv this morning showed the stats for deaths and if people would watch that I think a lot of people would calm down and stop been so anxious about things. life is about risks and weighing up if its worth the risk or not . 2 kids have sadly died out of 10 million and both had very likely conditions ,so chance of sending your child to school and been at risk is zero but parents are mostly terrified about sending there kids back to school. the professor called covid 19 the over 75 disease where you are 10000 times more at risk if your over 90, but you are 1000 times more at risk from other illnesses under 50, this propaganda has to stop its incredibly damaging and I know personally 3 people who have died this past month who have covid 19 put on there death certificate as possible cause of death along with the 2 real reasons while they passed away , they weren't tested for covid 19 either but they will enter the stats of 30000 plus ,why do you think germany has less than 25% deaths even though there population is higher? its how the figures are counted. 

 

I've no idea why you picked up a virus. It could be any number of reasons. It could be that you picked it up prior to leaving home, or at the airport. One theory is that during our daily grind our body is constantly producing stress hormones, such as adrenaline, which can help to ward off infection. But once we relax, these levels drop and make us susceptible to illness, so it could be down to that. As for planes, believe what you want, but I've never picked up a virus after flying.

 

As for football grounds, I've never picked up a virus, but then there has never been a virus in our lives like Covid-19. If you have the attitude that you can just wander around because you are not in a certain group of people who can be affected, then quite frankly you're extremely short sighted. How the hell do you think viruses spread? From person to person, and you could be the person spreading it, to others who are at risk.

 

Do you watch the news? Do you realise that people from every age group, without underlying medical conditions, are dying every day from this? I bet you believe that 5G has something to do with this too!

 

Your attitude to this is completely wrong and IMHO it's people with this kind of attitude who are keeping the rest of locked-down, as those are the kinds of people who take unecessary risks and journeys.

[Dick_Turpin]

3 hours ago, handworth52 said:

well if that's true then why did I get a virus 2days after arriving on holiday for about 60% of my last few holidays? its a well known fact that an airplane is a bad place to pick up a virus ,so is any enclosed place. outdoors zero.  as for football matches ive never caught a virus within 3 days of a game and I go to appx 40 games a season . personally I think football grounds/open aired ones are very low risk . tight enclosed concourses yes maybe a risk. closing the whole world down when the risk is almost zero for the under 50s is madness ,the damage this will do to peoples lives ,jobs,unable to pay for the rent/mortgage is going to be incredibly hard. the professor on tv this morning showed the stats for deaths and if people would watch that I think a lot of people would calm down and stop been so anxious about things. life is about risks and weighing up if its worth the risk or not . 2 kids have sadly died out of 10 million and both had very likely conditions ,so chance of sending your child to school and been at risk is zero but parents are mostly terrified about sending there kids back to school. the professor called covid 19 the over 75 disease where you are 10000 times more at risk if your over 90, but you are 1000 times more at risk from other illnesses under 50, this propaganda has to stop its incredibly damaging and I know personally 3 people who have died this past month who have covid 19 put on there death certificate as possible cause of death along with the 2 real reasons while they passed away , they weren't tested for covid 19 either but they will enter the stats of 30000 plus ,why do you think germany has less than 25% deaths even though there population is higher? its how the figures are counted. 

A common cold is a virus. Have you never caught a cold within three days of going to a game. I don't know how old you are but how would you even remember or take note of something like that?