Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
urban.spaceman

League Suspended.

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

 I just cannot see a load of teams staying together ending well..

 

If that is what happens to get the season finished then fair enough but you are going to need a lot of cooperation and good will.

I think they have to stay in their own bubbles (Hotel ) within a reasonable coach journey to a couple neutral venues - I assume that this was the basis for suggesting that KP, molineux and villa park were chosen initially. 
 

how that works for the EFL is questionable to say the least - I can easily see the EFL not finishing 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the time the footballers are back training we'll probably know the 'exit strategy' and by the time they're playing, the rest of the country will be phasing into the new normal anyway. They won't be the odd ones out in having to go to work but they will be in the fact they'll  be typically moddy coddled compared to the rest of us. 

 

Still nice to see some of them kicking up a fuss having not managed to agree wage cuts/deferrals whilst millions of people have no choice but to continue working whilst earning a fraction in a year what these guys earn in a week. Not wanting to play is fine but stop drawing your wage and spare us the woe is me bollocks. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

So far in the UK, 140 people under 40 years old have died of coronavirus.  (About 4 per million.)  Nearly all of then had pre-existing health conditions.  Footballers are far more likely to die in their car going to the game than they are to die of coronavirus caught while playing it.

Not dying doesn't mean they recover unscathed.

 

Young healthy people, although less likely to die, still have a decent percentage chance of developing severe disease and subsequent permanent lung damage. Even if they only get mild or moderate disease, the after effects of the virus (fatigue, fever, cough) can often last for months. 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-recovery-damage-lung-function-gasping-air-hong-kong-doctors-2020-3

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I think they have to stay in their own bubbles (Hotel ) within a reasonable coach journey to a couple neutral venues - I assume that this was the basis for suggesting that KP, molineux and villa park were chosen initially. 
 

how that works for the EFL is questionable to say the least - I can easily see the EFL not finishing 

Did read St George's Park being suggested too.

 

We have nice apartments at the Vic .. and a hospital just in case !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

My issue is though, why will football be any safer to play in late July (2 weeks early start for 2020/21) than it will be in June if the authorities decide it's ok to resume? I think many people are thinking/hoping it'll all be sound next season when if it is then the decision to cancel a nearly finished season and the chaos that causes teams fighting promotion/relegation/titles/Europe etc is mad. There is a obviously a risk that until there's a vaccine that the virus can and will continue to spread unless we all stay at home and let the economy completely eradicate the whole country and world and it wipes out more people in the long run indirectly. Sport isn't by any means an essential service like food and convenience but there's also thousands and thousands of people who are affiliated with sport that cannot work if it's suspended indefinitely and these are the ones who tend not to have a few million in the bank or more to tie them over. Sport is essential to many people's health and well being both physically and mentally (both playing and watching) and although I don't want to come across as careless, if professional team sport is unable to continue for 12-18 months then I think that's either a bad decision or the world really will be on it's knees and the knock on effect is going to be horrific.

It's not going to be safer until a vaccine is created and given to everyone in the country. The country cannot just not work for the next 12 months or so whilst they wait.

 

The leisure industry is a job just like farming or factory work and I really don't see why governments are deciding that these people can't work. There are a lot of B&B owners, resort shop owners, bar owners, restaurant owners and "spectacle" owners who are going to go out of business. Many of these are self-employed hard working individuals who have created work and prosperity for themselves and jobs and prosperity (without the risks) for many others are getting shafted. The people who work for them (which at the extreme end is footballers) are expecting to be paid, without doing anything. It makes no sense to me.

 

The governments are making decisions that they shouldn't have the power to make, but since they are they need to foot the bill - which means we the population are going to foot the bill - do we want to pay footballers millions of pounds or is it more realistic that everyone gets a universal amount that keeps people's heads above the water?

 

If kids can go to school and workers can go to work, then entertainers can entertain. Everyone simply needs to take the most care possible. Perhaps having 30,000 people in a stadium watching a match is stupid but having 30 footballers playing in a stadium and people watching on TV isn't. If people want to drink in a bar or eat in a restaurant they should be able to and if people want to walk along a beach or in a park, they should be able to; and if footballers don't want to play they should resign and get another way to earn a living. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

Sky and BT would prefer to show the matches as long as they aren't portrayed as the bad guy. I think that for this decision to be taken, the majority of stakeholders probably voted in favor of it, and that could well include the clubs and players themselves. Or at least some representation.

 

You can see the argument both ways. As a Leicester fan if the season ends now we get Champions League next season and that would be incredible for the club. It also doesn't risk anything in terms of lives.

 

But on the other hand, life has to go back to normal at some point, and until a vaccine is available for all, there will always be an element of risk. If games are held behind closed doors, and world class health and testing facilities are on stand by to set it up, then I think it's OK. At some point life must go on, and if there's 100 people at the game (total of all staff plus match officials) then that sounds OK. I have seen that many people que outside a Sainsburies near me!

 

Is the move money motivated? 110% it is. But it does also have benefits. People are bored, and worse than that many are depressed. As a Watford fan I am sure that just like us you don't support your team because you expect them to win things, you watch them because they are YOUR club, that you love! Being able to see your boys play again can bring many of us joy and there is something to be said for that. And you have Nigel Pearson in charge who will keep you up!

 

Perhaps I am in the minority for thinking like this though!

A good balanced article.  I agree that the process of "getting back to normal" is bound to include some elements of risk along a long, rocky road.  Both government and most players appear to be in favour of finishing the season somehow and the league have the resources and the will to pull out all the stops to minimise the risk.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, FIF said:

It's not going to be safer until a vaccine is created and given to everyone in the country. The country cannot just not work for the next 12 months or so whilst they wait.

 

The leisure industry is a job just like farming or factory work and I really don't see why governments are deciding that these people can't work. There are a lot of B&B owners, resort shop owners, bar owners, restaurant owners and "spectacle" owners who are going to go out of business. Many of these are self-employed hard working individuals who have created work and prosperity for themselves and jobs and prosperity (without the risks) for many others are getting shafted. The people who work for them (which at the extreme end is footballers) are expecting to be paid, without doing anything. It makes no sense to me.

 

The governments are making decisions that they shouldn't have the power to make, but since they are they need to foot the bill - which means we the population are going to foot the bill - do we want to pay footballers millions of pounds or is it more realistic that everyone gets a universal amount that keeps people's heads above the water?

 

If kids can go to school and workers can go to work, then entertainers can entertain. Everyone simply needs to take the most care possible. Perhaps having 30,000 people in a stadium watching a match is stupid but having 30 footballers playing in a stadium and people watching on TV isn't. If people want to drink in a bar or eat in a restaurant they should be able to and if people want to walk along a beach or in a park, they should be able to; and if footballers don't want to play they should resign and get another way to earn a living. 

 

 

Agreed, it's definitely a balancing act and can't simply be that sport is just hoyed out until the entire country has had the vaccination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

Sky and BT would prefer to show the matches as long as they aren't portrayed as the bad guy. I think that for this decision to be taken, the majority of stakeholders probably voted in favor of it, and that could well include the clubs and players themselves. Or at least some representation.

 

You can see the argument both ways. As a Leicester fan if the season ends now we get Champions League next season and that would be incredible for the club. It also doesn't risk anything in terms of lives.

 

But on the other hand, life has to go back to normal at some point, and until a vaccine is available for all, there will always be an element of risk. If games are held behind closed doors, and world class health and testing facilities are on stand by to set it up, then I think it's OK. At some point life must go on, and if there's 100 people at the game (total of all staff plus match officials) then that sounds OK. I have seen that many people que outside a Sainsburies near me!

 

Is the move money motivated? 110% it is. But it does also have benefits. People are bored, and worse than that many are depressed. As a Watford fan I am sure that just like us you don't support your team because you expect them to win things, you watch them because they are YOUR club, that you love! Being able to see your boys play again can bring many of us joy and there is something to be said for that. And you have Nigel Pearson in charge who will keep you up!

 

Perhaps I am in the minority for thinking like this though!

At least 300 people needed for a Premier League match
http://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk/data/208/reader/reader.html?social#!preferred/0/package/208/pub/208/page/126/article/36730

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, FIF said:

It's not going to be safer until a vaccine is created and given to everyone in the country. The country cannot just not work for the next 12 months or so whilst they wait.

 

The leisure industry is a job just like farming or factory work and I really don't see why governments are deciding that these people can't work. There are a lot of B&B owners, resort shop owners, bar owners, restaurant owners and "spectacle" owners who are going to go out of business. Many of these are self-employed hard working individuals who have created work and prosperity for themselves and jobs and prosperity (without the risks) for many others are getting shafted. The people who work for them (which at the extreme end is footballers) are expecting to be paid, without doing anything. It makes no sense to me.

 

The governments are making decisions that they shouldn't have the power to make, but since they are they need to foot the bill - which means we the population are going to foot the bill - do we want to pay footballers millions of pounds or is it more realistic that everyone gets a universal amount that keeps people's heads above the water?

 

If kids can go to school and workers can go to work, then entertainers can entertain. Everyone simply needs to take the most care possible. Perhaps having 30,000 people in a stadium watching a match is stupid but having 30 footballers playing in a stadium and people watching on TV isn't. If people want to drink in a bar or eat in a restaurant they should be able to and if people want to walk along a beach or in a park, they should be able to; and if footballers don't want to play they should resign and get another way to earn a living. 

 

Assuming you mean now - well they shouldn’t because doing that will increase their chances of becoming infected in a big way which in 20% of cases will mean NHS workers being exposed to the virus. Of course those people who feel that they want to play ‘Russian roulette’ could sign a form that says if they get ill then the NHS won’t treat them and they can potentially be left to die but what about all the people that they may infect before they become symptomatic and even worse, what if they are asymptomatic and infect many people over a couple weeks ?  

 

If you mean after restrictions are relaxed and there is a way to effectively socially distance in those environments then I agree (although bars/pubs are going to be v difficult) 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Assuming you mean now - well they shouldn’t because doing that will increase their chances of becoming infected in a big way which in 20% of cases will mean NHS workers being exposed to the virus. Of course those people who feel that they want to play ‘Russian roulette’ could sign a form that says if they get ill then the NHS won’t treat them and they can potentially be left to die but what about all the people that they may infect before they become symptomatic and even worse, what if they are asymptomatic and infect many people over a couple weeks ?  

 

If you mean after restrictions are relaxed and there is a way to effectively socially distance in those environments then I agree (although bars/pubs are going to be v difficult

Obviously I didn't mean now.

 

If you're suggesting that bars and pubs are going to be closed for 12/18 months and any time in the future that we have a virus then I think you're crazy.

 

People are simply going to have to adapt to a post covid19 outbreak world and act responsibly. Of course under your scenario sporting events in general and football in particular are finished as spectator sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FIF said:

Obviously I didn't mean now.

 

If you're suggesting that bars and pubs are going to be closed for 12/18 months and any time in the future that we have a virus then I think you're crazy.

 

People are simply going to have to adapt to a post covid19 outbreak world and act responsibly. Of course under your scenario sporting events in general and football in particular are finished as spectator sports.

So we agree
 

pubs/bars is for the CV thread

 

football matches ...... once daily infections are below a few hundred (which will happen by end summer if they get the testing infrastructure sorted and people observe the restrictions), then I think mass gatherings will be allowed as the chances that people are infectious will be fairly slim - face masks will be mandatory and I also think they will use the thermometers/ temp scanners  on the way in to ensure anyone with a temp isn’t admitted.  It may well be that there aren’t away supporters allowed though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FIF said:

Obviously I didn't mean now.

 

If you're suggesting that bars and pubs are going to be closed for 12/18 months and any time in the future that we have a virus then I think you're crazy.

 

People are simply going to have to adapt to a post covid19 outbreak world and act responsibly. Of course under your scenario sporting events in general and football in particular are finished as spectator sports.

Why is 12 months without spectator sports and pubs 'crazy'? France has already announced no spectator sports until September, which is 6 months, so 12 months is not at all farfetched especially if countries start reporting second waves. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, StanSP said:

 

 

Presumably West Ham, Man City and arsenal wont be allowed to play any games at their own stadium????

 

EDIT: reading the article reveals those venues to be nothing more than tittle tattle. 

 

grounds away from built up areas?  Are there many? 
 

surely they should be selecting smaller ones too. Pointless to play behind closed doors in an empty cavernous stadium ....

 

Edited by st albans fox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, brucey said:

Why is 12 months without spectator sports and pubs 'crazy'? France has already announced no spectator sports until September, which is 6 months, so 12 months is not at all farfetched especially if countries start reporting second waves. 

France hasn't announced that at all. You're confusing a statement about Ligue1 with sports in general. 6 months isn't 12 months and to think it is is naive.

 

People are not going to accept 12 or 18 months without sports or getting together. We don't live in a state controlled country. I'm not sure if you are underestimating or overestimating people. Still the UK were very slow to get on the covid serious train, tell me how you feel about confinement in 4 months time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

A statement saying nothing

There ultimately isn't a need to make a decision yet.

 

Boris is set to announce his roadmap of the unlocking of the economy next week. If this includes no sport (as per France government example) then there will be a need to end the season and work out a solution on how to decide the final rankings and outcomes. If there is a possibility of resuming based on certain medical criteria being met, then they can work to that target. There is simply no point showing all cards now and making a hasty decision.

 

I personally don't think it will finish but there is no need for a decision to be made yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Did they really need a 4 hour meeting to come out with that statement? What were they talking about lol I presume they also watched Lord of the Rings together in that time.

 

😂😂😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chrysalis said:

abandoned not voided, the results and standings stand.

This is the Dutch league - it looks as though most European countries are ending their seasons. Although I think current season should be finished, it's looking unlikely now. The Dutch conclusion seems the the best of the options if our's is abandoned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ealingfox said:

Did they really need a 4 hour meeting to come out with that statement? What were they talking about lol I presume they also watched Lord of the Rings together in that time.

 

They’ve obviously no doubt spoke about resuming. But right now all they can say is follow government guidelines, imagine the uproar if they’d said they’re gonna start back. Even though we all know it’s starting back in June. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...