String fellow Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 It's not just about the players themselves getting infected. It's also about them potentially passing on the virus to others, who could then die. I think players have every right to be worried about playing, especially as it would probably involve them travelling in close proximity to others.
Lionator Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 I may be in the minority here but I don't think this is a legitimate reason to delay a restart any further. Ultimately we're looking at an absolute maximum mortality rate of around 0.05% (1 in 2000) for under 40's and even that number will drop considerably in healthy adults, which professional footballers are. The whole idea of 'phase 2' test and trace of the response to the virus is to carry on when 1 or 2 people get a positive test result, we cannot hide everyone away the moment a tiny percentage test positive or else we'll get nowhere.
Webbo Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 20 minutes ago, st albans fox said: Is there a Mrs webbo ? if so, she clearly isn't like my missus and probably 90% of everyone else’s ............. I agree with you btw ...... Yes there is, she works at Asda getting to exposed to all sorts of viruses for a fraction of what the footballers get. Having said that, I don't think she'd be too upset if football was cancelled forever.
st albans fox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 6 minutes ago, Webbo said: Yes there is, she works at Asda getting to exposed to all sorts of viruses for a fraction of what the footballers get. Having said that, I don't think she'd be too upset if football was cancelled forever. Ah yes ..... I remember now ..... my experience with spouses is that they tend to know everything about risk and spending and they tend to mention everything about the former when it relates to you and little about the latter when it relates to them .......
st albans fox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 25 minutes ago, String fellow said: It's not just about the players themselves getting infected. It's also about them potentially passing on the virus to others, who could then die. I think players have every right to be worried about playing, especially as it would probably involve them travelling in close proximity to others. But being tested at least twice a week gives them reassurance that they don’t have it and are unable to pass it onto anyone ......I’m still surprised that the suggestion is that they use the drive through testing centres. Surely the premier league can afford for non public services to be used in this case. I would be testing the players and staff every other day.
TrentFox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 Off-topic, significantly, but it may not get its own thread. Just to reflect on the sad news about John Ridley, today. I remember him as a solid player at an exciting, but chaotic, period in our history. Would hate to think his passing went unmentioned.
st albans fox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 10 minutes ago, TrentFox said: Off-topic, significantly, but it may not get its own thread. Just to reflect on the sad news about John Ridley, today. I remember him as a solid player at an exciting, but chaotic, period in our history. Would hate to think his passing went unmentioned. I have absolutely no memory of him, despite attending pretty well every game in pen 2 through that period ..... strange .......
Super_horns Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 2 hours ago, Webbo said: They'd be checked twice a week, have a doctor on tap and they're super fit young athletes, the chances of any serious complications if they did contract the virus are virtually nil. The safety argument is really weak. And they would in theory have to stay in a hotel for weeks so you would have to trust them to stick to the guidelines. Games to be stream on YouTube? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/some-premier-league-matches-could-be-shown-on-youtube-wjt0k7cnr?wgu=270525_54264_15886101811589_2cd1b96c30&wgexpiry=1596386181&utm_source=planit&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_content=22278 See to remember people complaining the quality wasn't very good and it kept buffering?
TrentFox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 1 hour ago, st albans fox said: I have absolutely no memory of him, despite attending pretty well every game in pen 2 through that period ..... strange ....... I don’t think he played much, but it was around the time I started going every game with buddies and every detail was magical. Especially team-sheets.
Chrysalis Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 On 03/05/2020 at 13:51, StanSP said: Does it hold up the integrity of the competition if relegation is removed? Also, with next season potentially starting later because of how late the season is due to finish should these plans go ahead, how would a 22/23-team season work? And how many seasons would there be a 22/23-team season? Would that mean there would be football almost consistently until Qatar 2022 World Cup, as in no breaks? Bigger divisions, more games required. Not to mention what would happen with cup competitions domestically and across Europe. No it doesnt, I find their argument shameful. Are they trying to claim that not playing the games has more integrity or removing the outcome for having the worst results over 38 games has more integrity?
st albans fox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 8 minutes ago, Chrysalis said: No it doesnt, I find their argument shameful. Are they trying to claim that not playing the games has more integrity or removing the outcome for having the worst results over 38 games has more integrity? They’re not arguing anything ...... they simply do want to be relegated .........it’s straightforward self interest. We can all understand it and they should be honest and not hide behind other excuses ......
Chrysalis Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 I know that, but to pretend its for not self serving purposes, its a poor attempt. To stop them in their tracks we could say you choose to forfeit those games instead, they would soon be on the pitch.
KrefelderFox666 Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 If football restarts and the whole season is without fans in the top league, non-league football would see crazy attendances (assuming crowds of smaller grounds are accepted). Football needs to restart at some point or be faced with a complete overhaul. These past few weeks have really proven how pointless sport is to an extent and to think about the money that is thrown about. Footballers have become jobless essentially, just on a very high wage!
Blue-fox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 If you take away relegation there is zero point in playing the rest of this season. They should all man up and face the challenge rather than find excuses not to. Odds are they will be in a similar position next season anyway.
st albans fox Posted 4 May 2020 Posted 4 May 2020 1 hour ago, KrefelderFox666 said: If football restarts and the whole season is without fans in the top league, non-league football would see crazy attendances (assuming crowds of smaller grounds are accepted). Football needs to restart at some point or be faced with a complete overhaul. These past few weeks have really proven how pointless sport is to an extent and to think about the money that is thrown about. Footballers have become jobless essentially, just on a very high wage! It’s not the size of the crowd, it’s the density ..... I can’t see non league or league football having crowds unless its very regulated (ie. 500 people ticket only spread out in a ground which can hold 2000).
StanSP Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 Gordon Taylor has apparently said games could last less than 45 mins each half So much for the integrity of the game being kept in tact.
RowlattsFox Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 If you have to make any changes to the rules of the games then it shouldn't return, its like every day is April fools day.
fox in the sox Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 18 minutes ago, StanSP said: Gordon Taylor has apparently said games could last less than 45 mins each half So much for the integrity of the game being kept in tact. If we have a spell of very hot weather will it be possible to play so many matches in quick succession?
KrefelderFox666 Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 10 hours ago, st albans fox said: It’s not the size of the crowd, it’s the density ..... I can’t see non league or league football having crowds unless its very regulated (ie. 500 people ticket only spread out in a ground which can hold 2000). But in reality, if there are no top 4 league teams in action, how many of those fans will instead see their local team. For example, Coalville/Barwell whoever in the local leagues. Many Leicester fans will get their football fix there instead. Non-league will not see normal attendances if the top leagues have fans banned. People will flock to any live football games they can. Which will make it dangerous. Absolutely agree, normal levels of fans are no issue in the lower leagues.
KrefelderFox666 Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 The best solution is to freeze all football for one year and then pick up where left off in March next year. There is no chance football can happen in the next months unless it becomes a farce. No fans, players will be ruled out, teams will be ruled out weeks at a time due to someone being infected. It will just be utter chaos and not enjoyable. As much as we all want it to return, it will be awful if it does. Write next season off completely, then start from where we are now.
shailen Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 Rather than cancel the league, I'd rather they play the remaining fixtures as a penalty shoot out. 5 penalties each, win 3 points, draw 1 point each and lose 0 points. Not ideal but it will eliminate the risk of players getting close to each other and help us to reach a conclusion on this season.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 18 hours ago, String fellow said: It's not just about the players themselves getting infected. It's also about them potentially passing on the virus to others, who could then die. I think players have every right to be worried about playing, especially as it would probably involve them travelling in close proximity to others. And nhs workers, posties, shop workers, bus drivers etc, who all get paid much less, should just carry on right?
StanSP Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 5 minutes ago, fox in the sox said: If we have a spell of very hot weather will it be possible to play so many matches in quick succession? Yes. You can play but still have breaks within the game for drinks. Let's face it, a spell of 'very hot weather' is unlikely to be so sustained in this country.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 26 minutes ago, StanSP said: Gordon Taylor has apparently said games could last less than 45 mins each half So much for the integrity of the game being kept in tact. If I was stuck in a lift with Adolf Hitler, Gordon Taylor and a gun with one bullet, I'd shoot Hitler and pistol whip Taylor to death. Actually, if the gun was fully loaded, I'd do the same.
Nalis Posted 5 May 2020 Posted 5 May 2020 3 minutes ago, shailen said: Rather than cancel the league, I'd rather they play the remaining fixtures as a penalty shoot out. 5 penalties each, win 3 points, draw 1 point each and lose 0 points. Not ideal but it will eliminate the risk of players getting close to each other and help us to reach a conclusion on this season. No player is allowed to touch the ball with their hand except the keeper. Each shoot out gets a 15 minute slot. Just under 100 matches played over the late May bank holiday with the last gameweek played simultaneously on Monday night.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.