Football & Coronavirus [READ MOD NOTE IN FIRST POST - updated 06-05-20]

Cantona's Collars

6 wrote: »

Link for what? Businesses that are working in Ireland?

Edit, Mitch beat me to it. Add in pharmaceutical and medical companies. All working with huge work forces. .

They aren't,I know people working in the sector and their workforce is halved in many places and only partial workforce in others.
No talk of testing in places either. Widespread testing of hospital staff is only up and running over the past week. Anyone not on the frontline are only getting their tests since then.
Supermarket staff aren't getting priority over medical staff in testing so someone is telling porkies.

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

They aren't,I know people working in the sector and their workforce is halved in many places and only partial workforce in others.
No talk of testing in places either. Widespread testing of hospital staff is only up and running over the past week. Anyone not on the frontline are only getting their tests since then.
Supermarket staff aren't getting priority over medical staff in testing so someone is telling porkies.

I think you need to read my original post again. I never mentioned any business getting priority. Mitch explained this already.. .

Fitz*

jayo26 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Sport_Witness/status/1255115723896209408?s=19


Could be another major league ended for the season.

PSG champions by the sounds of things.

Cantona's Collars

6 wrote: »

I think you need to read my original post again. I never mentioned any business getting priority. Mitch explained this already.. .

Neither of you came out with facts,just threw out sectors and names of retail business.
Facts are what are needed now instead of random stuff about thousands of employees being tested when anyone who can is working at home and many places on skeleton crews with at best some temperature readings at random for those who are going in.
With Mitch's wife being a nurse, I thought he'd be a bit more clued in.

jayo26

FitzShane wrote: »

PSG champions by the sounds of things.

Yeah I'd say they will give them the title alright.

Fitz*

jayo26 wrote: »

Yeah I'd say they will give them the title alright.

There was news a couple of weeks ago that the French leagues wanted to resume playing, but now it sounds like the French government effectively took the decision out of their hands and put a finish to the season.

Null & void not an option. there is a meeting in May to discuss promotion, relegation & final rankings.

Cantona's Collars

jayo26 wrote: »

Yeah I'd say they will give them the title alright.

They may as well at the start of each season anyway.
"A nothing league Bill"

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Neither of you came out with facts,just threw out sectors and names of retail business.
Facts are what are needed now instead of random stuff about thousands of employees being tested when anyone who can is working at home and many places on skeleton crews with at best some temperature readings at random for those who are going in.
With Mitch's wife being a nurse, I thought he'd be a bit more clued in.

I honestly think you're gone on a tangent.

Apologies for the multipost, but otherwise we'll go around in circles.

Original post.

6 wrote: »

Large scale companies with thousands of people are managing this in Ireland as we speak. Surely these guys can manage it too, particularly with the benefit of regular testing. They don't know how good they'll have it.

Me explaining that large scale companies are managing to work without issue. My argumument is surely football teams can too particularly with the benefit of regular testing.

I think you just seen testing and mixed up the points.




Mitch then listing companies that are working without issue. Reinforcing my point.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Link? none.

Tesco.
SuperValu
Lidl
Aldi.

Mitch basically explaining to you my original post. Same as I'm now doing.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Was 6 not referring to large scale companies working at the moment where one staff memeber being positive hasn't ground the entire company or industry to a halt.

The fact they go on to mention regular testing being something footballers would be getting over and above these large companies, I don't understand how regular swabbing is part of the initial claim.

Please explain.

Hope that clears it up

Fitz*

I assume we take it that the CL & EL are now gone as Lyon & PSG won't be able to train and play in games?

Mitch Connor

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Neither of you came out with facts,just threw out sectors and names of retail business.
Facts are what are needed now instead of random stuff about thousands of employees being tested when anyone who can is working at home and many places on skeleton crews with at best some temperature readings at random for those who are going in.
With Mitch's wife being a nurse, I thought he'd be a bit more clued in.

The claim was never wide spread testing was available or in place. My wife has seen very limited testing in work.

I don't see why you are having a pop at me over it to be honest. You misread a post, ignored the explanation and then have a pop. Well done you.

FitzShane

FitzShane wrote: »

I assume we take it that the CL & EL are now gone as Lyon & PSG won't be able to train and play in games?

Good point. Didn't think of that.

Mitch Connor

FitzShane wrote: »

I assume we take it that the CL & EL are now gone as Lyon & PSG won't be able to train and play in games?

Uefa have been looking at August to finish out the EL and CL as is, so potentially it does not effect it. But then I suppose they would have to be back in training July (mid) to play early or mid August. So if they can't train til August 1 (if then) there is a huge disadvantage.

Cantona's Collars

6 wrote: »

I honestly think you're gone on a tangent.

Apologies for the multipost, but otherwise we'll go around in circles.

Original post.



Me explaining that large scale companies are managing to work without issue. My argumument is surely football teams can too particularly with the benefit of regular testing.

I think you just seen testing and mixed up the points.




Mitch then listing companies that are working without issue. Reinforcing my point.






Mitch basically explaining what I'm doing in this exact post.




Hope that clears it up

The original debate was about testing and the ramifications if a player tests positive,you came in about large companies managing and testing.
Not much football being played in large scale companies.
You're implying that somehow these large companies are doing something that they clearly aren't and correlated it with football,a contact sport where a virus can be spread easily.
Chalk and cheese.
What supermarkets have to do with lads playing football also I don't know, there's tenuous links and that's beyond tenuous.

Back on topic and to what we were originally debating,a player tests positive the day before a game then contact tracing will need to be done and anyone he's been in contact with is sent to isolation and that's a team ruled out. That's what we were talking about.

Cookiemunster

jayo26 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Sport_Witness/status/1255115723896209408?s=19

Could be another major league ended for the season.

Looks like Portugal may be about to go the same way.
https://twitter.com/PortuGoal1/status/1255122336661024769

Cantona's Collars

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Link? none.

Tesco.
SuperValu
Lidl
Aldi.

Well you brought this up and somehow made a correlation to testing at football clubs.
You like to talk about absolutes and facts so I thought you of all people would have been clued in before posting lists of supermarkets and somehow getting a link between their work practices and testing and football clubs.

8-10

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Back on topic and to what we were originally debating,a player tests positive the day before a game then contact tracing will need to be done and anyone he's been in contact with is sent to isolation and that's a team ruled out. That's what we were talking about.

That's probably going to be the reality of it alright. Only teams who have all players & personnel tested negative for 14 days or whatever before a fixture can kick off a game. If that means cancellation a day before then it would have to happen.

If there's no fans travelling to these games it lessens the impact of a cancellation but I wonder if they can be a bit more creative about it, maybe have floating fixtures where you can look at who is available to play if a team has to pull out. Backup fixtures/opponents based on teams who are clear to play and hasn't played in at least 3 days. Have rolling games every few days and daily testing of everyone.

Until there's a vaccine I think there's got to be an acceptance that we're not just going to flip back to the same normal we had before, and that's throughout society not just related to soccer. So if there's an acceptance it's not going to be the same, they should try to be creative about what can happen and have an open mind.

Fitz*

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Uefa have been looking at August to finish out the EL and CL as is, so potentially it does not effect it. But then I suppose they would have to be back in training July (mid) to play early or mid August. So if they can't train til August 1 (if then) there is a huge disadvantage.

No sport before August 1st in France would put a real restraint on the Champions League QFs going ahead.

Mitch Connor

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

The original debate was about testing and the ramifications if a player tests positive,you came in about large companies managing and testing.
Not much football being played in large scale companies.
You're implying that somehow these large companies are doing something that they clearly aren't and correlated it with football,a contact sport where a virus can be spread easily.
Chalk and cheese.
What supermarkets have to do with lads playing football also I don't know, there's tenuous links and that's beyond tenuous.

Back on topic and to what we were originally debating,a player tests positive the day before a game then contact tracing will need to be done and anyone he's been in contact with is sent to isolation and that's a team ruled out. That's what we were talking about.

The original point was about football grinding to a halt if one player tests positive.

The counter is that many business are running without that happening - one person testing positive doesn't shut down the company or industry.

I'm sure there have been cases of positive staff members or family members in Tesco etc... those places haven't shut down as a result.

Contact tracing and isolation are done, in large part, because testing wasn't or isn't available. If you were not showing symptoms you were not tested, just told to isolate and monitor.

If the PL clubs can carry out continuous testing (which is part of the restart plan) then the need for everyone who has been in contact with a player to isolate for 2 weeks is arguably removed.

You would need to be carrying out long check viral checks on a 36 hour rolling basis (imo) as well as the rapid testing each day (imo). If you are positive, you are out. If you are negative, you are in.

Reality is also that is simply not enough, you can be asymptomatic, you could be a false negative.

There is also the question of testing capacity, given the amount of tests that would need to be carried out on a daily and weekly basis. Even if the club fund and conduct the tests themselves (they'd have to) that is still capacity being taken from somewhere, even if they aren't being whisked to the front of an NHS line every morning.

I'm not arguing a return is easy, or morally right, or correct from a health and safety perspective.

But the initial argument that 6 (or I) claimed wide spread testing is in place at Tesco et al is Bull. It was never said.

Mitch Connor

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Well you brought this up and somehow made a correlation to testing at football clubs.
You like to talk about absolutes and facts so I thought you of all people would have been clued in before posting lists of supermarkets and somehow getting a link between their work practices and testing and football clubs.

The only argument being made was that these places don't grind to a halt over a positive test. Just as, arguably, football should not grind to a halt either. If any restart plan is dependent on no footballer or staff member testing positive, there is simply zero point in restarting until a vaccine is found.

Initial point:

Large scale companies work without grinding to a halt over a positive test result. You asked for a link.
I couldn't be bothered to provide one but examples of large companies working as such were provided.

You are the one that has decided a point about them testing was made. It was not.

You are the one that has decided they were claimed to be the same as football clubs. No such claim was made. (EDIT: Actually, this was a claim made by 6, insofar as saying if those large scale companies can work without grinding to a half football clubs should be able to.)

You have made up points and arguments, attributed them to people who didn't say them, and then resorted to passive aggressive shot taking on top of it.

Mr.Nice Guy

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

They may as well at the start of each season anyway.
"A nothing league Bill"

Might want to take a look at the recent performances in Europe from England's farmer's league.

Cantona's Collars

Mitch Connor wrote: »

The original point was about football grinding to a halt if one player tests positive.

The counter is that many business are running without that happening - one person testing positive doesn't shut down the company or industry.

I'm sure there have been cases of positive staff members or family members in Tesco etc... those places haven't shut down as a result.

Contact tracing and isolation are done, in large part, because testing wasn't or isn't available. If you were not showing symptoms you were not tested, just told to isolate and monitor.

If the PL clubs can carry out continuous testing (which is part of the restart plan) then the need for everyone who has been in contact with a player to isolate for 2 weeks is arguably removed.

You would need to be carrying out long check viral checks on a 36 hour rolling basis (imo) as well as the rapid testing each day (imo). If you are positive, you are out. If you are negative, you are in.

Reality is also that is simply not enough, you can be asymptomatic, you could be a false negative.

There is also the question of testing capacity, given the amount of tests that would need to be carried out on a daily and weekly basis. Even if the club fund and conduct the tests themselves (they'd have to) that is still capacity being taken from somewhere, even if they aren't being whisked to the front of an NHS line every morning.

I'm not arguing a return is easy, or morally right, or correct from a health and safety perspective.

But the initial argument that 6 (or I) claimed wide spread testing is in place at Tesco et al is Bull. It was never said.

Football as a sport is based on contact,in a work environment for the large part it can be avoided.
As it is, training is being done at a distance but drills, patterns of play have to be worked on,all need contact in some shape or form. The practicalities are mind bending in how to avoid any contact infection. A player could play yet go home and have a family member who gets covid and passes it on,he goes to training and as we know symptoms may not present in some or take a while and he infects more at the club and boom, that's a team out of action.
What is the term? The R or something like that where an average person was infecting 3 others. That's down to less than one but in an environment where contact is a given what happens?
That is the conundrum that needs to be solved.

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

The original debate was about testing and the ramifications if a player tests positive,you came in about large companies managing and testing.
Not much football being played in large scale companies.
You're implying that somehow these large companies are doing something that they clearly aren't and correlated it with football,a contact sport where a virus can be spread easily.
Chalk and cheese.
What supermarkets have to do with lads playing football also I don't know, there's tenuous links and that's beyond tenuous.

Back on topic and to what we were originally debating,a player tests positive the day before a game then contact tracing will need to be done and anyone he's been in contact with is sent to isolation and that's a team ruled out. That's what we were talking about.

If that's the way you took it up fair enough. Mitch was able to pick it up easily.

My original point still stands. Lots of large companies in Ireland are working without issue. Football teams can do this too. Plus they will be regularly tested.


Regarding your second point, it depends how often these guys are being tested, and how they are training.

Hypothetical example... one player is positive on a Thursday, but training has been in groups of five all week. Social distancing assumed everywhere else. This means 4 people are in scope, and are tested again. All are negative or 1 is positive or 2 are positive etc etc. Doesn't mean the whole squad is out.

I'm sure teams will need to change the way they train, eat, come to training etc etc.

Iused2likebusts

Again as I keep mentioning its not realistic to think they will complete 1 and a quarter seasons between now and May 2021.
Something has to give is it 1 the rest of this season 2 european competitions 3 shortened 20/21 season. Its deluded to think they can fit it all in. We will have to deal with the virus and try to get as much people back to work however also knowing that if there is another surge in the future to protect our hospitals we will need to shut down again. Even if we have no sport till september the virus is still going to be here and they cancel this season and start a new one in september chances are that will end up having to stop for a while aswell and we wont get that finished either.
A calendar season for 2021 and 2022 is the way out of these problems.

Cantona's Collars

6 wrote: »

If that's the way you took it up fair enough. Mitch was able to pick it up easily.

My original point still stands. Lots of large companies in Ireland are working without issue. Football teams can do this too. Plus they will be regularly tested.


Regarding your second point, it depends how often these guys are being tested, and how they are training.

Hypothetical example... one player is positive on a Thursday, but training has been in groups of five all week. Social distancing assumed everywhere else. This means 4 people are in scope, and are tested again. All are negative or 1 is positive or 2 are positive etc etc. Doesn't mean the whole squad is out.

I'm sure teams will need to change the way they train, eat, come to training etc etc.

I won't reply as I think I covered it in my reply to Mitch and I'd just be repeating myself.
Football can't control social distancing on a field and that's the problem.

~Rebel~

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Football as a sport is based on contact,in a work environment for the large part it can be avoided.
As it is, training is being done at a distance but drills, patterns of play have to be worked on,all need contact in some shape or form. The practicalities are mind bending in how to avoid any contact infection. A player could play yet go home and have a family member who gets covid and passes it on,he goes to training and as we know symptoms may not present in some or take a while and he infects more at the club and boom, that's a team out of action.
What is the term? The R or something like that where an average person was infecting 3 others. That's down to less than one but in an environment where contact is a given what happens?
That is the conundrum that needs to be solved.

You seem to expect training to occur in some way similar to before. I doubt that will happen. This was discussed a lot just yesterday... it’s far more likely that how these players train will be entirely alien to how they used to. No more than cells of 3 or 4 playing together (if even, and only with players in different positions so you can’t wipe out your back line at once), all positional talks and team discussions done remotely, practical drills of players acting out whole patterns of play not done at all. It’s going to be a huge impediment for them, just as it is for everyone else. I’d be astonished if a whole team was together any time other than game day, when they’ll have been tested the day before.

It’ll come down to common sense really, as much as they might like to do great practical excercises working together, if that brings up the risk of the team being ruled out of games, they won’t be doing it.

Iused2likebusts

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Football as a sport is based on contact,in a work environment for the large part it can be avoided.
As it is, training is being done at a distance but drills, patterns of play have to be worked on,all need contact in some shape or form. The practicalities are mind bending in how to avoid any contact infection. A player could play yet go home and have a family member who gets covid and passes it on,he goes to training and as we know symptoms may not present in some or take a while and he infects more at the club and boom, that's a team out of action.
What is the term? The R or something like that where an average person was infecting 3 others. That's down to less than one but in an environment where contact is a given what happens?
That is the conundrum that needs to be solved.

We have had examples of footballers getting it callum hudson odoi and a couple of others dont think it spread around the teams however Im open to correction on that. Did other arsenal players get it off arteta?

Cantona's Collars

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

We have had examples of footballers getting it callum hudson odoi and a couple of others dont think it spread around the teams however Im open to correction on that. Did other arsenal players get it off arteta?

Nobody knows as Ceballos said to the Standard that they were never tested.
I'd say if antibody testing was done that quite a few would be positive. Probably the same as many in society in general.

Cantona's Collars

~Rebel~ wrote: »

You seem to expect training to occur in some way similar to before. I doubt that will happen. This was discussed a lot just yesterday... it’s far more likely that how these players train will be entirely alien to how they used to. No more than cells of 3 or 4 playing together (if even, and only with players in different positions so you can’t wipe out your back line at once), all positional talks and team discussions done remotely, practical drills of players acting out whole patterns of play not done at all. It’s going to be a huge impediment for them, just as it is for everyone else. I’d be astonished if a whole team was together any time other than game day, when they’ll have been tested the day before.

It’ll come down to common sense really, as much as they might like to do great practical excercises working together, if that brings up the risk of the team being ruled out of games, they won’t be doing it.

Souness and Keane will hate this new type of football where nobody gets stuck in.

Mitch Connor

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Football as a sport is based on contact,in a work environment for the large part it can be avoided.
As it is, training is being done at a distance but drills, patterns of play have to be worked on,all need contact in some shape or form. The practicalities are mind bending in how to avoid any contact infection. A player could play yet go home and have a family member who gets covid and passes it on,he goes to training and as we know symptoms may not present in some or take a while and he infects more at the club and boom, that's a team out of action.
What is the term? The R or something like that where an average person was infecting 3 others. That's down to less than one but in an environment where contact is a given what happens?
That is the conundrum that needs to be solved.

It absolutely is an issue that needs to be solved. Wouldn't argue for a minute differently.

Social Distancing, as a practice, is required because you don't know if I am clear, and I don't know if you are clear. That is essentially the reason. Its protection based on ignorance (and not using ignorance as a pejorative term)

If you know everyone in a given scenario is 'clean', then there is no need for Social Distancing.

The idea is that with continious testing and perfect testing, you know who is 'clear' and who is infected. In such a scenario, football (and whatever) is fine. (along with other issues being taken care of like surfaces being clean etc).

Where it falls apart is testing is not perfect. False negatives can and likely will occur.
On top of that all the players could be clear, but the handle on the dressing room door could be infected. So then they all (potentially) get infected going to the match.

I think in a 'perfect world' it can be argued that precautions can be taken and football can come back. But in reality the precautions are not going to be 100% effective.

I think that is a fact we are all going to have to live with over the next 12-18 months, maybe more or less. Do none of us venture outside? If you can't drive to work, alone, do you know longer travel to work and lose your ability to work? Public Transport is going to be as much of a danger as a game of football would be. If we can't solve football, public transport doesn't have a chance.

Cookiemunster

Now confirmed in France.

https://twitter.com/PhilippeAuclair/status/1255135834510000130

Mitch Connor

~Rebel~ wrote: »

You seem to expect training to occur in some way similar to before. I doubt that will happen. This was discussed a lot just yesterday... it’s far more likely that how these players train will be entirely alien to how they used to. No more than cells of 3 or 4 playing together (if even, and only with players in different positions so you can’t wipe out your back line at once), all positional talks and team discussions done remotely, practical drills of players acting out whole patterns of play not done at all. It’s going to be a huge impediment for them, just as it is for everyone else. I’d be astonished if a whole team was together any time other than game day, when they’ll have been tested the day before.

It’ll come down to common sense really, as much as they might like to do great practical excercises working together, if that brings up the risk of the team being ruled out of games, they won’t be doing it.

If you can't train in normal sized groups, how can you argue you can play a match?

(royal you, general question).

I can only see these social distancing training rules being in place short term. Once football returns is is nonsense to continue such rules.

~Rebel~

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Souness and Keane will hate this new type of football where nobody gets stuck in.

Be interesting to see how this sort of training will dictate how players play on the pitch - will they be extra fired up after being held back all week (or for months in the first game)?

I doubt what happens on the pitch will be any less firey than normal anyway, which is exactly why training has to be changed so much to keep them apart till then, so you have an excellent chance of actually fielding 11 players.

~Rebel~

Mitch Connor wrote: »

If you can't train in normal sized groups, how can you argue you can play a match?

(royal you, general question).

I can only see these social distancing training rules being in place short term. Once football returns is is nonsense to continue such rules.

The training is in small groups BECAUSE you have to play a full match that week. You can’t test every day realistically, so you keep the players distanced so the risk of infection is low - then you test at the end of the week before the match to make sure everyone is clear. If someone tests positive, at most you only lose 3 or so players - and you know every player taking the field is clean.

Maybe by then they’ll be able to carry out daily testing easily, in which case they could train more like normal... as I understand it though, the current most accurate tests take a fair bit of time.

jayo26

Bad news!!!!! 639 deaths in UK today and that's just from hospitals. If the lift lockdown to any degree next week this thing could take off again and we may not even get football next season never mind this summer.

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Football can't control social distancing on a field and that's the problem.

That is correct with the current process of doing things. However, what if they could control if players were covid positive going onto a game.

They need to get to a point where they can do this, or be able to isolate players if they are positive. Otherwise, how will they ever deal with it?

Cookiemunster

Never though about this, all these sporting bans will affect next season too.

https://twitter.com/dermotmcorrigan/status/1255138605728534537

Iused2likebusts

jayo26 wrote: »

Bad news!!!!! 639 deaths in UK today and that's just from hospitals. If the lift lockdown to any degree next week this thing could take off again and we may not even get football next season never mind this summer.

828 deaths in hospitals last tuesday so 639 is a step in the right direction for them. Tuesdays figures are always higher due to underreporting at the weekend. Yesterdays figures also compared favourably with the previous monday as did sundays figures with the previous sunday. I agree they should leave the measures in place but they are moving in the right direction based on the figures.

niallo27

jayo26 wrote: »

Bad news!!!!! 639 deaths in UK today and that's just from hospitals. If the lift lockdown to any degree next week this thing could take off again and we may not even get football next season never mind this summer.

1 month ago over a thousand were dying every day in Italy and now they are talking about bringing football back. A month is a long time for this virus.

Shanotheslayer

niallo27 wrote: »

1 month ago over a thousand were dying every day in Italy and now they are talking about bringing football back. A month is a long time for this virus.

Did Italy have as much as an issue compared to England with following the lockdown protocols?

Alot of things are factors but until England actually start following the guidelines it will forever be delayed and dates changing

~Rebel~

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Did Italy have as much as an issue compared to England with following the lockdown protocols?

Alot of things are factors but until England actually start following the guidelines it will forever be delayed and dates changing

It sounded like in the north they were doing things properly - under duress, while further south they were taking the piss altogether. I’ve a buddy from Milan (and she’s there throughout all this), saying for a lot of Italians there’s something culturally-inbuilt about defying orders from authority, especially further south.

Data from NHS. Shows the England deaths (actual day of death) peaked 3 weeks ago and are trending downward since. Great to see such a downward trend.



01/04/2020 593
02/04/2020 607
03/04/2020 651
04/04/2020 754
05/04/2020 720
06/04/2020 707
07/04/2020 774
08/04/2020 857
09/04/2020 747
10/04/2020 699
11/04/2020 732
12/04/2020 677
13/04/2020 648
14/04/2020 609
15/04/2020 647
16/04/2020 607
17/04/2020 569
18/04/2020 540
19/04/2020 495
20/04/2020 527
21/04/2020 446
22/04/2020 453
23/04/2020 413
24/04/2020 372
25/04/2020 304
26/04/2020 271
27/04/2020 93



https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/04/Data-notes-for-COVID-19-daily-deaths-publication-1.docx

Shanotheslayer

Great to see. But is that Monday figure a typo or something?

Seems like an anomaly in comparison to surrounding figures and clashed against each Monday

Edit: Just see you provided links. Thanks

davemckenna25

6 wrote: »

Data from NHS. Shows the England deaths (actual day of death) peaked 3 weeks ago and are trending downward since. Great to see such a downward trend.



01/04/2020 593
02/04/2020 607
03/04/2020 651
04/04/2020 754
05/04/2020 720
06/04/2020 707
07/04/2020 774
08/04/2020 857
09/04/2020 747
10/04/2020 699
11/04/2020 732
12/04/2020 677
13/04/2020 648
14/04/2020 609
15/04/2020 647
16/04/2020 607
17/04/2020 569
18/04/2020 540
19/04/2020 495
20/04/2020 527
21/04/2020 446
22/04/2020 453
23/04/2020 413
24/04/2020 372
25/04/2020 304
26/04/2020 271
27/04/2020 93



https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/04/Data-notes-for-COVID-19-daily-deaths-publication-1.docx

It does look good but the problem with "actual date of death charts" is that it can take anything from 3 days to 3 weeks to report a death. Not sure why it takes so long but has been discussed by Dr Tony Holohan.

So this means that the deaths are probably declining but the last 2 to 3 weeks aren't an accurate number as they most probably still have to be added to.

Amirani

6 wrote: »

Data from NHS. Shows the England deaths (actual day of death) peaked 3 weeks ago and are trending downward since. Great to see such a downward trend.



01/04/2020 593
02/04/2020 607
03/04/2020 651
04/04/2020 754
05/04/2020 720
06/04/2020 707
07/04/2020 774
08/04/2020 857
09/04/2020 747
10/04/2020 699
11/04/2020 732
12/04/2020 677
13/04/2020 648
14/04/2020 609
15/04/2020 647
16/04/2020 607
17/04/2020 569
18/04/2020 540
19/04/2020 495
20/04/2020 527
21/04/2020 446
22/04/2020 453
23/04/2020 413
24/04/2020 372
25/04/2020 304
26/04/2020 271
27/04/2020 93



https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/04/Data-notes-for-COVID-19-daily-deaths-publication-1.docx

They're hospital deaths only. Based on the latest ONS data today, it looks like those numbers above may be less than half of all deaths.

So I don't think it can be surmised that deaths have peaked based on that NHS table.

Cork Boy 53

davemckenna25 wrote: »

It does look good but the problem with "actual date of death charts" is that it can take anything from 3 days to 3 weeks to report a death. Not sure why it takes so long but has been discussed by Dr Tony Holohan.

So this means that the deaths are probably declining but the last 2 to 3 weeks aren't an accurate number as they most probably still have to be added to.

Those figures are from the NHS in the UK. They are not following the same protocols as the health authorities in Ireland are.

Iused2likebusts

Amirani wrote: »

They're hospital deaths only. Based on the latest ONS data today, it looks like those numbers above may be less than half of all deaths.

So I don't think it can be surmised that deaths have peaked based on that NHS table.

It is much worse but we are comparing like with like by comparing hospital deaths since the crisis started.

RasTa

no no no no, it's not "great" to see at all and completely misleading. You sound like Gove or Hancock with that statement

MeMen2_MoRi_

A little insight into the thinking of getting LOI games up and running behind closed doors

Other conditions include:

- Players travelling alone to sessions but they can be dropped off by household contacts

- They must record their temperature before leaving home, and if it's greater than or equal to 37.6 they must contact club medical staff ahead of departure and they will then decide if they should attend or be referred to a GP

- All players should check their temperature with a thermometer 4 hours after they arrive home from the training session. This should be rechecked 4 hours later, and both reported to the team medical staff.

- Players should arrive in training gear and change into football boots in their car

- Their temperature upon arrival should be re-checked by a designated club official

- There should be no use of training rooms or indoor meetings

- Any outdoor meetings should be for no longer than 10 minutes with social distancing measures observed

- All training equipment (balls, bags, small goals, poles, cones) should be sterilized with disinfectant before and after the session. Goal posts should be wiped down after each session.

Meanwhile, the draft document details how matchday operations would account for a maximum of 214 people being in the stadium, ranging from players and officials and ballboys/ballgirls to broadcasters, media and match delegates.

Proposed terms and conditions for the day of a closed door game include:

- Teams travelling long distances should abide by the Safe Distancing Guidelines when on the team bus. This may mean getting two (disinfected) team buses to a match venue

- Teams arriving to the stadium should be timed so they don’t arrive together.

- Access to the field of play should be coordinated so that the teams and match officials enter at different times and also for going from field of play to changing rooms

- Special plans for pre-match meals with different arrangements for home and away sides

- After the game, individual shower facilities would have to be in place or else players would have to enter the shower area one at a time

- Kit should be washed immediately after the final whistle.

- All players should have their own accessories throughout the whole of match-day (water bottles, tape, bandages, sprays)

- Deep clean and disinfection of changing rooms should take place on match-day.

All clubs would have to appoint a Covid-19 regulator who would oversee all of these operations.

Personnel would have to be checked in and out of the stadium, with a central register of those present maintained.

Players and backroom staff would have to fill out a health related questionnaire before they could get back on the training pitch.

https://m.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/temperature-checks-training-limits-and-covid-19-regulator-league-of-ireland-behind-closed-doors-proposal-revealed-39164629.html

Behind a paywall, full C&P is on Reddit soccer

Mitch Connor

Why enter and exit the field of play separately? They're going to be playing a match.

Fitz*

I didn't want to quote the whole piece but that bit did seem a bit pointless to me too.

Unless, it's an attempt to keep the two sets of coaching staff apart and keep the referees & officials apart from the two sets of staff too?


The bit with the temperatures is a great measure though and we'll thought through.