General Premier League Thread 2019-20

ricero

Just read Karen Bradys latest bizzare comments. My god she is a total embaressment and oppurtunist. If i was a West Ham fan id be ashamed of my life with her at the helm.

Saying that they should disinfect the grass if football is to return but it could end up killing the grass. Really hope West Ham go down now.

Using a pandemic as an oppurtunity to try save your team from relegation is vile.

Shanotheslayer

ricero wrote: »

Using a pandemic as an oppurtunity to try save your team from relegation is vile.

Huh? You mean the same way Liverpool tried to save themselves money during the pandemic only for it to backlash?

She's doing the exact same thing.

noodler

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Huh? You mean the same way Liverpool tried to save themselves money during the pandemic only for it to backlash?

She's doing the exact same thing.

Here we go.

Serious mental gymnastics there.

Shanotheslayer

noodler wrote: »

Here we go.

Serious mental gymnastics there.

Perhaps letting the poster respond rather than jumping the gun would save you the hassle rather than writing ''here we go''

The club this poster supports was doing similar antics so to post when another club does it as 'Vile' I think warrants a posts.

Using words like 'Ashamed & Vile is extremely OTT

ERG89

Doesn't really make sense for West Ham to want the league to come back. They were doing sh*t for about 5 months and were only going to avoid relegation if teams around them somehow performed worse than them. The likes of Norwich and Bournemouth must be praying for the league to be declared void as they were deep in the sh*t too; the difference is that they havent individuals at their clubs writing columns in one of Britians least respected newspapers (which is a very, very low bar).

I wonder was Karen is feeling as strong about the conga lines and other outdoor festivities of 75th anniversary of VE Day in Britain??

ebbsy

ERG89 wrote: »

Doesn't really make sense for West Ham to want the league to come back. They were doing sh*t for about 5 months and were only going to avoid relegation if teams around them somehow performed worse than them. The likes of Norwich and Bournemouth must be praying for the league to be declared void as they were deep in the sh*t too; the difference is that they havent individuals at their clubs writing columns in one of Britians least respected newspapers (which is a very, very low bar).

I wonder was Karen is feeling as strong about the conga lines and other outdoor festivities of 75th anniversary of VE Day in Britain??

If the League was declared void Norwich and Bournemouth would not be around to celebrate it.

Drumpot

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Perhaps letting the poster respond rather than jumping the gun would save you the hassle rather than writing ''here we go''

The club this poster supports was doing similar antics so to post when another club does it as 'Vile' I think warrants a posts.

Using words like 'Ashamed & Vile is extremely OTT

I react the same way when I see people mention “integrity of the league” with regards to the EPL on any capacity ....



True story, I had a dream last night that I had a middle head bald patch like the guy in this gif. I’ve always said I will shave it all off if it goes like that...

Girly Gal

No true football fan wants to see the season voided and it's really not in anybody's interests for the season to be voided, it's a last resort that no one wants as the financial consequences would be dire and that's before legal challenges are even brought in to it. I have yet to hear a serious argument for voiding the season, it only appears to be people who don't want to see Liverpool win the league who want it voided, but, don't want to admit this. These are the same people who are desperate to have an asterisk attached when Liverpool do eventually win or awarded it despite Liverpool being 25 points clear and no realistic chance of City catching them. Regardless how they decide to finish this season, next season will be comprised as the whole season is likely to be played behind closed doors and possibly at neutral venues too.

Collie D

I thought voiding - as in pretending the season didn’t really happen - was completely off the table?

ebbsy

Collie D wrote: »

I thought voiding - as in pretending the season didn’t really happen - was completely off the table?

I'd say it is off the table.

Some clubs would go under.

The asterisk will stand for...






























GOAT

.G.

Collie D wrote: »

I thought voiding - as in pretending the season didn’t really happen - was completely off the table?

It is off the table. Uefa took it off the table a few weeks back. If leagues want to send teams to their competitions next season (if they happen) then they need to decide those places via sporting merit. You can't do that if you decide this league season never happened.

.G.

dupe

.G.

Deleted User wrote: »

The asterisk will stand for...






























GOAT

I'm fully ready for the asterix, our fans are ready to own it. I actually hope it happens. All these banter lads thinking we'll actually give a sh!t lolz

We'll have won a 29 game league the same way any team before us won a 42 game league or a 38 game league, mathematically. And if it went to 38 games we'd have won it then too and they all know it. Can't wait.

It'll be the most talked about league title ever like the last one before the war or the first one after it.

MD1990

Football is coming back. The government has made that clear and the culture secretary Oliver Dowden enforced that view with his comments yesterday.

The debate is no longer whether football should return but whether the Premier League can deliver a model every club accepts as a fair and equitable solution before resumption.

At the start of this season there was no way Watford should beat Liverpool. Jürgen Klopp’s side are the world and European champions and play a style of football that is incredible to watch. They fully deserve to be crowned Premier League champions, however this season finishes.

But on February 29, we did beat Liverpool. It seems a long time ago now, but to even have a hope of overcoming one of the greatest sides this country has produced, we needed a level playing field. We needed to play at Vicarage Road, in front of our own fans with every single player mentally and physically in the best condition we could get them.

We needed to have been able to plan fully, to put together a game plan prepared weeks in advance by the manager Nigel Pearson and his coaching and analytics staff. We needed to control every element at our disposal. If all that comes together, then we have a chance of beating Liverpool or indeed any of the top teams. This happens more regularly in the Premier League than it does in, say, Germany, Italy or Spain. That’s why the Premier League is such a fantastic spectacle, loved throughout the world.

Now take a look at the compromises involved in Project Restart, which is aiming to resume the season on June 8 and play the remaining 92 Premier League games behind closed doors at neutral venues. I, of course, absolutely accept we cannot have supporters in the stadium. That goes without saying in the present situation.

However, we are now told we cannot play our remaining home games at Vicarage Road and the familiarity and advantage that brings. This against a backdrop of players who, having seen their lives turned upside down along with the rest of the world, are suddenly expected to perform as if nothing has happened, despite the rest of society probably still facing the kind of restrictions unenforceable on a football pitch.

We have club medical staff working under conditions that no doctor or physio has ever experienced with guidelines that, in no small part, are based at this stage on supposition rather than scientific fact. And with all these compromises and health risks we are asked to finish a competition that bears no resemblance to the one we started, which could end a small club like Watford’s time in the Premier League.

So is this fair? Does it have any semblance of sporting integrity? Of course not.

The Bundesliga will return on May 16 with home and away fixtures. They have found a way to implement all the proposals we have been talking about in our Premier League meetings without the need to resort to neutral venues.

Do the authorities seriously believe our clubs, in their own grounds, cannot deliver a safe environment for the 300 or so people involved in hosting a single Premier League match? Because, in the world of Covid-19, there is no such thing as an entirely safe environment wherever we play.

The police also talk about fans flouting restrictions when football restarts and that this is a concern for the authorities, but I believe we would have more control over supporters playing at our own grounds.

After all, Liverpool were emphatic their fans would be sensible and listen to club instructions when their own mayor came out against a return to football. If Liverpool wholeheartedly believe this when they are 25 points clear and on the brink of a first title for 30 years, I’m sure all other fans would follow suit.

Critics will say my position is founded on self-interest and they would be absolutely right. I have a duty to protect my club and the people employed by it, some of whom have worked for Watford Football Club for more than 20 years and dedicated their lives to it.

There is no altruism in the Premier League. There are 20 different vested interests, which sometimes align but more often than not work purely to protect each individual club.

That is why some clubs are happy to sign up to Project Restart because arguably there is only an upside in participating in this compromised format; it means Liverpool can win the title, other clubs can book their place in Europe next season or potentially fight their way up the table from a position of safety.

But when at least six clubs — and I suspect more — are concerned about the clear downside and the devastating effects of playing in this kind of distorted nine-game mini-league, then I believe the Premier League has a duty of care to address those concerns. If we start and finish a whole season under these conditions and at neutral venues when everybody knows the rules when we start, not created in a time of crisis, then that is clearly fair. To be asked to finish a quarter of the season under new rules and conditions is an entirely different proposition.

How can the long-term future of clubs be determined under these fundamentally changed conditions? How is there any semblance of fairness? To wave aside all the fears and concerns is too simplistic. Surely all 20 clubs must agree the fairest way forward to complete the season?

I hope we can now come together and find a solution to enable the season to end safely and fairly

https://www.watfordfc.com/news/club/premier-league-chairmans-statement

classy statement from Watford.

I think they should wait until the games can be played at every ground.

8-10

MD1990 wrote: »

I think they should wait until the games can be played at every ground.

Watford are one of 3 Premier League teams that have used this time to begin extensive work on their pitch. Their ground isn't able to restart but they should own that decision to go ahead with work

ebbsy

It will just come down to money, and the full season will play out because of that.

davemckenna25

Girly Gal wrote: »

No true football fan wants to see the season voided and it's really not in anybody's interests for the season to be voided, it's a last resort that no one wants as the financial consequences would be dire and that's before legal challenges are even brought in to it. I have yet to hear a serious argument for voiding the season, it only appears to be people who don't want to see Liverpool win the league who want it voided, but, don't want to admit this. These are the same people who are desperate to have an asterisk attached when Liverpool do eventually win or awarded it despite Liverpool being 25 points clear and no realistic chance of City catching them. Regardless how they decide to finish this season, next season will be comprised as the whole season is likely to be played behind closed doors and possibly at neutral venues too.

Hate to break it to you but it's not all about Liverpool.
Other posters and people in the media might have their own reasons.

noodler

MD1990 wrote: »

https://www.watfordfc.com/news/club/premier-league-chairmans-statement

classy statement from Watford.

I think they should wait until the games can be played at every ground.

I appreciate his honesty, that he is partial etc.

That's exactly why I think the majority decision should stand.

Girly Gal

davemckenna25 wrote: »

Hate to break it to you but it's not all about Liverpool.
Other posters and people in the media might have their own reasons.

I know it's not all about Liverpool, but, I haven't heard another reason for voiding the season. I don't see how it benefits anyone. Can you list all the other reasons for voiding the season.

5starpool

The way I see it is that if they void the season because it is unsafe to play, then football at that level can't resume until post vaccine (if there is one). The neutral venues one is clutching at straws in my view.

MD1990

5starpool wrote: »

The way I see it is that if they void the season because it is unsafe to play, then football at that level can't resume until post vaccine (if there is one). The neutral venues one is clutching at straws in my view.

I think it is lazyiness from the UK Police.

Wait till July & have every stadium used.
Playing Everton at the Etihad or Man City in Sheffield or wherever will be very strange.

I want some games at Anfield too.

noodler

The home advantage without fans just seems a bit overegged on the face of it.

davemckenna25

Girly Gal wrote: »

I know it's not all about Liverpool, but, I haven't heard another reason for voiding the season. I don't see how it benefits anyone. Can you list all the other reasons for voiding the season.

When did I mention voiding the season?

Girly Gal

davemckenna25 wrote: »

When did I mention voiding the season?

My original post discussed voiding the season as the only way to stop Liverpool winning the league, you then responded to my post saying there were other reasons. I assumed you were talking about voiding the season as I can't see what else from my post you were referring to.

Guy:Incognito

MD1990 wrote: »

Playing Everton at the Etihad or Man City in Sheffield or wherever will be very strange.

I want some games at Anfield too.

Personally I think it'll make **** all difference. The tv cameras will be looking at the pitch. There'll be no lingering shots of crowds or jumping to them for reactions. It's going to make little to no difference to us watching on tv where the game is on.

I don't care if it's in Stanley Park tbh! Just looking forward to watching football again whenever that may be. Hopefully not too far away.

hetuzozaho

6 wrote: »

I don't care if it's in Stanley Park tbh! Just looking forward to watching football again whenever that may be. Hopefully not too far away.

I used to look down my nose at some of the Super Sunday games, never again!

Augme

Don't really get how the home ground argument stands up. By playing in a neutral venue then Watford are losing out on the advantage of playing at home venue, but by playing in neutral venues villa and all the other relegation threatened sides are also losing out on the advantage of playing at home so does that not in a sense cancel it out and make it an even playing field?

Similar, by teams avoiding having to play away games they are benefitting and increasing their chances of get point(s) at designated "away" fixtures as the team they are playing not getting an increased advantage by playing at home.

I just can't see the logic in saying a specific team is losing out by not playing at home.

alchemist33

Augme wrote: »

Don't really get how the home ground argument stands up. By playing in a neutral venue then Watford are losing out on the advantage of playing at home venue, but by playing in neutral venues villa and all the other relegation threatened sides are also losing out on the advantage of playing at home so does that not in a sense cancel it out and make it an even playing field?

Similar, by teams avoiding having to play away games they are benefitting and increasing their chances of get point(s) at designated "away" fixtures as the team they are playing not getting an increased advantage by playing at home.

I just can't see the logic in saying a specific team is losing out by not playing at home.

Agreed. Also the notion some are peddling that their fans are so much better than other fans that playing at a neutral venue disadvantages them. There are.exceptions of course, but this "best supporters in the land" looks like pandering. I wonder if some chairmen are raising spurious objections because they don't want to be seen calling for the season to be voided.

Panrich

Well this is an example of what’s ahead no matter what decisions are arrived at for venues.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/52601471

It could turn into a total fiasco with some clubs unable to fulfill fixtures or having to field a youth team to do so.

.G.

It's a bit of a mess. Different regions in Germany have different rules. For example with FC Koln and the three members of their squad getting it, the rest of the squad was allowed to train as normal beacuse their tests were negative.

But we absolutely will have players and coaches testing positive in the premier league too. They'll try finish the league, like Spain and Germany are trying to but they may well not be able to.

Bridge93

Brighton have had their third positive virus case confirmed yesterday says the Chief Executive

davemckenna25

Girly Gal wrote: »

My original post discussed voiding the season as the only way to stop Liverpool winning the league, you then responded to my post saying there were other reasons. I assumed you were talking about voiding the season as I can't see what else from my post you were referring to.

You said that people wanting the season voided only wanted it done so as to stop Liverpool.
I said that its not all about Liverpool and that people can have other reasons......

What you said was "it only appears to be people who don't want to see Liverpool win the league who want it voided, but, don't want to admit this."

For example a reason I've heard mentioned is teams not being relegated, we start fresh next season with the teams from the start of this season....

however just to clarify this isn't my opinion or something I agree with...its something that has been mentioned.

Hope that clears it up for you.

Girly Gal

davemckenna25 wrote: »

You said that people wanting the season voided only wanted it done so as to stop Liverpool.
I said that its not all about Liverpool and that people can have other reasons......

What you said was "it only appears to be people who don't want to see Liverpool win the league who want it voided, but, don't want to admit this."

For example a reason I've heard mentioned is teams not being relegated, we start fresh next season with the teams from the start of this season....

however just to clarify this isn't my opinion or something I agree with...its something that has been mentioned.

Hope that clears it up for you.

Thanks for clarifying, I've heard that argument about the relegation teams too, but , it's not really a serious option for them as voiding the season may lead to some clubs going under. The reality is whatever the best financial option that is available will prevail. Every club will have their own agenda and will rightly try to get the best outcome for themselves whether it's fair or not.

Drumpot

davemckenna25 wrote: »

You said that people wanting the season voided only wanted it done so as to stop Liverpool.
I said that its not all about Liverpool and that people can have other reasons......

What you said was "it only appears to be people who don't want to see Liverpool win the league who want it voided, but, don't want to admit this."

For example a reason I've heard mentioned is teams not being relegated, we start fresh next season with the teams from the start of this season....

however just to clarify this isn't my opinion or something I agree with...its something that has been mentioned.

Hope that clears it up for you.

I wonder would they do a 2 up, 4 down next season (only two up next season aswell). Basically say to the championship that Only 2 teams will be promoted or no teams will be promoted. Championship can have a 5 team Play-off with 2nd place automatically getting into semi final.

Any decision made is all about least worst option. If all EPL clubs agree to this and it’s literally one club (in second spot) who are out out, it’s the best of a bad scenario and only Leads to one disgruntled club if they don’t win that playoff.

.G.

There's problems regardless of avenue they choose aside from being able to finish all leagues as normal. If they promote but don't relegate you've extra games to fit into a calendar that's already pretty stuffed to begin with the added very likely fact that next season could well have enforced breaks due to further waves too. More games in likely less time.

LuckyLloyd

There is no normal unaffected “next” season coming. The Premier League needs to figure out a way of continuing football pre vaccine, or roll the dice with 12 - 18 months of zero revenue. The smaller clubs must be very confident they can weather the storm and / or that BT and SKY will keep cutting cheques while they sit it out.

Either way, leaving aside that it is highly unlikely a full August - May calendar will be played, there is no chance of fans in stadiums and all of the associated side revenue that comes with that. So they better start dancing for TV sooner rather than later.

noodler

I think it's really starting to hit home here in Ireland that the tax and expenditure adjustments required on the fiscal side will be ever greater the longer this goes on.

The financial imperative to open up, maybe even moreso than in the roadmap, is growing

Girly Gal

As a compromise to playing in neutral venues and to sort out relegation and promotion for this season maybe only the 2 bottom teams get relegated automatically, promote the top 2 teams from the championship and have the 3rd bottom team in premier league go into play offs with the championship teams for the last premier league place.

citytillidie

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There is no normal unaffected “next” season coming. The Premier League needs to figure out a way of continuing football pre vaccine, or roll the dice with 12 - 18 months of zero revenue. The smaller clubs must be very confident they can weather the storm and / or that BT and SKY will keep cutting cheques while they sit it out.

Either way, leaving aside that it is highly unlikely a full August - May calendar will be played, there is no chance of fans in stadiums and all of the associated side revenue that comes with that. So they better start dancing for TV sooner rather than later.

By the time this settles down in England there might only be 3 full time leagues with teams not being able to get match day revenues.

Strumms

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There is no normal unaffected “next” season coming. The Premier League needs to figure out a way of continuing football pre vaccine, or roll the dice with 12 - 18 months of zero revenue. The smaller clubs must be very confident they can weather the storm and / or that BT and SKY will keep cutting cheques while they sit it out.

Either way, leaving aside that it is highly unlikely a full August - May calendar will be played, there is no chance of fans in stadiums and all of the associated side revenue that comes with that. So they better start dancing for TV sooner rather than later.

Taking the fans out of it, you are going to have 22 players on a pitch, plus subs who for 90 plus minutes will be perspiring, spitting, working in not close proximity to each other but in ACTUAL contact with each other. Away from the pitch there are subs, physios, Doctors, kit men, and numerous support staff and grounds people, security, catering, TV teams, medical and more besides...working in close proximity.

To put on a premier league game in a ground you will have approx...

42 players (two squads including a few reserves per squad in case injury or illness,)

18 management and coaching staff

6 referees and assistants

40 security

50 TV people (presenters, producers, runners, camera people, riggers, director)

There will be more besides..

So before you put or considering putting bums on seats to watch a match live, you are going to be ordering 150 plus people back to work, in close proximity. To provide what is in all essence primarily an entertainment source. Entertainment! No great difference to a local circus, cinema, theater etc. Yes football is also business and revenue and a lot of it will be lost but rather that then lives.

Drumpot

Strumms wrote: »

Taking the fans out of it, you are going to have 22 players on a pitch, plus subs who for 90 plus minutes will be perspiring, spitting, working in not close proximity to each other but in ACTUAL contact with each other. Away from the pitch there are subs, physios, Doctors, kit men, and numerous support staff and grounds people, security, catering, TV teams, medical and more besides...working in close proximity.

To put on a premier league game in a ground you will have approx...

42 players (two squads including a few reserves per squad in case injury or illness,)

18 management and coaching staff

6 referees and assistants

40 security

50 TV people (presenters, producers, runners, camera people, riggers, director)

There will be more besides..

So before you put or considering putting bums on seats to watch a match live, you are going to be ordering 150 plus people back to work, in close proximity. To provide what is in all essence primarily an entertainment source. Entertainment! No great difference to a local circus, cinema, theater etc. Yes football is also business and revenue and a lot of it will be lost but rather that then lives.

Does a premier league game have to be played in a ground? Can you use a much smaller venue (even a training pitch) and place a load of cameras and make it a much lower key requirement for bodies?

Feels like the use of stadiums is more about the optics. Asides from “integrity of the league” (lol) argument, what practical use is there to using stadiums?

Girly Gal

Strumms wrote: »

Taking the fans out of it, you are going to have 22 players on a pitch, plus subs who for 90 plus minutes will be perspiring, spitting, working in not close proximity to each other but in ACTUAL contact with each other. Away from the pitch there are subs, physios, Doctors, kit men, and numerous support staff and grounds people, security, catering, TV teams, medical and more besides...working in close proximity.

To put on a premier league game in a ground you will have approx...

42 players (two squads including a few reserves per squad in case injury or illness,)

18 management and coaching staff

6 referees and assistants

40 security

50 TV people (presenters, producers, runners, camera people, riggers, director)

There will be more besides..

So before you put or considering putting bums on seats to watch a match live, you are going to be ordering 150 plus people back to work, in close proximity. To provide what is in all essence primarily an entertainment source. Entertainment! No great difference to a local circus, cinema, theater etc. Yes football is also business and revenue and a lot of it will be lost but rather that then lives.

Only the players and referees will be in close proximity the rest can practice social distancing the same as in every other work place, it should be easier to do this in large stadiums than in factories and shops where space is limited. Alot of the media could also work remotely, these are not insurmountable issues once planned properly, there is enough money in football to overcome these issues.
The biggest obstacles appear to be playing in neutral venues, fans congregating outside stadiums and having medical staff and ambulance service available when they are needed else where.

Strumms

Drumpot wrote: »

Does a premier league game have to be played in a ground? Can you use a much smaller venue (even a training pitch) and place a load of cameras and make it a much lower key requirement for bodies?

Feels like the use of stadiums is more about the optics. Asides from “integrity of the league” (lol) argument, what practical use is there to using stadiums?

Training pitch isn’t a bad idea from the point of view of being able to facilitate the games without the requirements of so many bodies... but again, there will still be the requirements for maybe 50% of the original number i guesstimated... you have less people at risk, that’s great, but you are still putting a good number at risk. For the purposes of both making money and entertainment. It’s not essential and it’s not very moral. We are all missing the sport we love, but I’d rather we miss the sport then people having to miss loved ones who contracted covid.

.G.

Football is still a business, that can't be dismissed regardless of the nature of that business. It contributes billions to the exchequer every year. Its directly and indirectly responsible for 100s of thousands of jobs. They will, like all businesses have to find a way to operate in the "new normal" because a vaccine is a long way off and even then you'll probably have millions around the globe who'll refuse to take it like they already refuse other vaccines including the widely available flu vaccine that generally only vunerable people take each year..

I'm a construction worker, I'm going back to to work this week. I've seen its plans to keep me and my colleagues safe. Its not safe, it couldn't possibly be safe but I'm in no position to refuse to do it and neither is my company or the company we work for. New normal needs to be found, all business will have to adapt and survive in that new normal and football is no different.

citytillidie

Why the need for presenters at the ground? As we see they can be done from a studio or even at home, so that cuts out people already, why the need for catering, kits can be left out before games and kit personal can then leave heck let them so sit in the stands away from each other, and have the away team bring their kit with them and home teams can be collected after players have left the dressing room. With zero fans then you can spread the subs out into the stands beside the dugouts leaving the dugouts for management teams to social distance a little bit more. There are ways around all that with the space you have in a stadium with no fans.

As for that last night there was a UFC where you had people sweating and bleeding over each other, i would rather be playing football than doing that sport. Yes 3 people at a time but then you have the blood still in the mat for the next fights.

Loafing Oaf

Drumpot wrote: »

Asides from “integrity of the league” (lol) argument, what practical use is there to using stadiums?

Quality of the pitch and dressing rooms etc. is one that springs to mind.

Drumpot

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Quality of the pitch and dressing rooms etc. is one that springs to mind.

Id of thought they can get these up to a decent level and if they train on them they can play a match on them?

Everything will be about compromise, I’m just not sure why they have to play games in stadiums.

Strumms

Girly Gal wrote: »

Only the players and referees will be in close proximity the rest can practice social distancing the same as in every other work place, it should be easier to do this in large stadiums than in factories and shops where space is limited. Alot of the media could also work remotely, these are not insurmountable issues once planned properly, there is enough money in football to overcome these issues.
The biggest obstacles appear to be playing in neutral venues, fans congregating outside stadiums and having medical staff and ambulance service available when they are needed else where.

A stadium and the type of work being done around getting a game of football going is not akin to ‘every other workplace’.. you have multiple people in teams as already pointed out, medical, playing, support, catering, security etc... ALL by the very nature of the work, done in teams..

‘Only’ the players and referees ? Is their wellbeing and safety and that of their families not just as important as all of us, all of ours?

How can a camera rigger lift a 60 kgs piece of kit on his own ? An injured player who needs putting on a stretcher be put there on his own, you’d have some job as a physio too... massaging a tight hamstring... Heaps of examples...

How can security to an access point be provided by a single officer with no support ?