Covid and Football, a circuit breaker or not?

MrsGrey

I take your point about teachers.

Separately, not sure about 'forcing' players into tournament-style bubbles. I don't believe it would be right (no matter how much anyone earns).

And if you make it voluntary, then you run into all sorts of problems, imo.

OutcastLondoner

That’s the crucial part. The Dutch league did a study that showed how little time players spend within the danger zone during a game, meaning there’s a very low risk of spread in-game. But they really need to sort out the rest of this. Players were supposed to be the extra careful to ensure they could keep playing and instead they’ve been reckless since the summer, completely going by their own rules. Yes they’re young but there’s a real chance of their long-term health being damaged by this.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

MunichHammer said:

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years said:

While that's true you can't put individuals at risk for others mental health

True but it's the same discussion with schools over here. If we want people to be able to go to work and keep the economy going then schools and Kindergardens need to remain open,thus putting teachers at risk for the good of others.

From that point of view (and seing hiw much they earn we should be able to ask them to bubble up) I surely think they could carry on playing, simply going into bio secure bubbles tournament style.

The difference here is that schools and education for teachers is required by law....whereas football is in essence just a sport, its a form of entertainment

MrsGrey

Not quite. Parents have to ensure their children are educated. That's the only (UK) law.

There's nothing that says it has to be 'by teachers', and nothing that says education has to be provided face to face or in a classroom setting.

Lukerz

MunichHammer said:

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years said:

While that's true you can't put individuals at risk for others mental health

True but it's the same discussion with schools over here. If we want people to be able to go to work and keep the economy going then schools and Kindergardens need to remain open,thus putting teachers at risk for the good of others.

From that point of view (and seing hiw much they earn we should be able to ask them to bubble up) I surely think they could carry on playing, simply going into bio secure bubbles tournament style.

As somebody who works in a secondary school, I can tell you this is exactly the attitude & will continue to be so for the remainder of this pandemic.

I am returning to work on Monday (albeit with a select group of students due in on the first week) & am more than happy to do so. We need to keep schools open. However, the staff work incredibly hard to ensure work is provided via computer platforms, via live or recorded lessons & online learning activities. That will be the case next week.

alderz

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years said:

alderz said:

epsom_bubbles said:

Why is football being played, especially in London and other Tier 4 areas? It's not for the well being of the fans, as none are at the matches. It can only be to satisfy Sky and other pay as you go services. The way it is going, there will be a huge backlog anyway. Why not close for January and run into the warmer weather, probably evening games?
Just a thought

I’ve seen a lot of comments about how the football is positive for people’s mental health. There is a lot that’s been taken away this year, and football carrying on is at least something people have been able to have.

While that's true you can't put individuals at risk for others mental health

I’m not saying it should be put above or below tbh. I’m not sure what the right answer is. The players seem to want to play on the whole. There are just a handful that seem to let the side down in terms of sticking to the rules (a bit like the rest of the population I guess)

alderz

OutcastLondoner said:

That’s the crucial part. The Dutch league did a study that showed how little time players spend within the danger zone during a game, meaning there’s a very low risk of spread in-game. But they really need to sort out the rest of this. Players were supposed to be the extra careful to ensure they could keep playing and instead they’ve been reckless since the summer, completely going by their own rules. Yes they’re young but there’s a real chance of their long-term health being damaged by this.

This is right tbh. Lots of footballers don’t seem to be taking it as seriously as they were. Even Rice posting those of him meeting Joshua and Mayweather after the boxing.

ASLEFshrugged

epsom_bubbles said:

The way it is going, there will be a huge backlog anyway. Why not close for January and run into the warmer weather, probably evening games?

Because its 2021 and we're not even halfway through the season. The Premier League is due to finish on 23 May, the Champions League final is on 29 May and the Euros start on 11 June. Seven teams are still playing in Europe and won't be able to play midweek until they are knocked out.

If we don't get all the matches finished before the Euros they will have to be played after the final on 11 July and were back to the same situation as we were at the end of last season.

After next the FA Cup next weekend there will be 19 weeks left to play 21 Premier League games plus the FA Cup and League Cup.

epsom_bubbles

Playing football during Covid, reminds me when Beckham visited a rarely visited tribe, who's chief was responsible for keeping them alive. He asked, through interpreters, what Beckham did. He tried to explain football.

ASLEFshrugged

Sorry but football and other sports are carrying on in the rest of the world, why should England be any different?

Lukerz

Football is not high risk, they are all being tested twice a week, are all considered young/fit/healthy and it takes place in a large outdoor space. As long as the tests continue, the players are responsible & they only go out to train and play (other than their essentials), there is not really any real risk and no reason to halt it.

epsom_bubbles

Just a thought. More people have died in the UK from Covid than the maximum capacity of London Stadium

ASLEFshrugged

epsom_bubbles said:

Just a thought. More people have died in the UK from Covid than the maximum capacity of London Stadium

Which is nothing to do with football but is a lot to do with the UK government being utterly incompetent and corrupt.

Fortuneseeker

ASLEF, coming across a bit "Ben Elton" there!

ASLEFshrugged

Fortuneseeker said:

ASLEF, coming across a bit "Ben Elton" there!

Germany, France, Italy, Spain all managing to keep football going with fewer Covid deaths. If that's a bit "Ben Elton" then I'm happy to be it

Fortuneseeker

ASLEF, he used to say "a little bit political" during his regular appearances on tv years ago.

ScotHammer

What are the rules governing the postponement of matches? For example, when teams have had players or staff testing positive, the games go ahead without them (e.g. Diop, Moyes). Whereas other teams (e.g. Fulham) have games postponed when players test positive.

I thought if 14 players were available you had to play? When it is potentially caused by a player being stupid, the club should help us all by penalising the player involved. Also, the club should be penalised for not fulfilling the fixture. These are highly paid individuals who are paid not to be stupid with their health and fitness.

At the end of the season, when we are looking at severe fixture congestion, any cancellation may penalise the opposition, who may be forced to play a lot of games in a short length of time. (Also, postponing teams may have key players fit again, e.g. Fulham).

alderz

If a team gets a Covid outbreak after their players were breaking rules (Lanzini, Milivojevic, Mitrovic, Lo Celso, for example) then any postponement should be a forfeit of the game. They all know the rules, and if players not taking them seriously is causing the outbreaks then the clubs shouldn’t be able to just postpone fixtures.

OutcastLondoner

I guess it’s a bit hard because it depends how their outbreak happened. If it’s clearly from a player being irresponsible, then maybe you can, but if it’s a player’s child catching it in school and then bringing it back, then it’s a bit insensitive to punish them. I don’t really know how you deal with all this fairly, really.

There probably needs to be more scrutiny of how clubs are enforcing rules though.

ScotHammer

alderz said:

If a team gets a Covid outbreak after their players were breaking rules (Lanzini, Milivojevic, Mitrovic, Lo Celso, for example) then any postponement should be a forfeit of the game. They all know the rules, and if players not taking them seriously is causing the outbreaks then the clubs shouldn’t be able to just postpone fixtures.

Totally agree, the players that are flaunting rules are the people and clubs that should be penalised, not the opposition.

Anyway, given £100k per week at 25 - I know I’d have been VERY responsible.😜

buffybegood

OutcastLondoner said:

I guess it’s a bit hard because it depends how their outbreak happened. If it’s clearly from a player being irresponsible, then maybe you can, but if it’s a player’s child catching it in school and then bringing it back, then it’s a bit insensitive to punish them. I don’t really know how you deal with all this fairly, really.

I agree that a lot of players are being irresponsible, but, especially where they've got children, it can be brought into a household in a number of ways.

ScotHammer

Or if their work colleagues (other players) have kids or elderly relatives, are they not being put at risk as well?

What are the actual rules for a postponement?

IronHerb

There is no hard and fast rule as far as I am aware.

jay_in_cpt

These footballers who show a lack of responsibility should have do mandatory work on the frontline, perhaps cleaning NHS hospital toilets, and as much as I love Lanzini, that includes him

IronHerb

I don't understand why they are not getting banned.

OutcastLondoner

IronHerb said:

I don't understand why they are not getting banned.

I think this and then clubs fining the players for missing games because of their own stupidity would fix things quite quickly. Just call it dangerous play and suspend them.

ScotHammer

IMO, it is the clubs who may get the benefit of rearranging a game, so penalise them, and let them deal with their own “stupid” employees (players).

ASLEFshrugged

IronHerb said:

I don't understand why they are not getting banned.

Possibly because there are no existing FA, Premier League or even FIFA rules about banning players who break restrictions during a pandemic.

ScotHammer

ASLEFshrugged said:

IronHerb said:

I don't understand why they are not getting banned.

Possibly because there are no existing FA, Premier League or even FIFA rules about banning players who break restrictions during a pandemic.

.....there surely must be something in their contracts about not breaking the law?

ASLEFshrugged

Like Grealish drunk driving?. He didn't even miss a game.