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

Dave0301

~Rebel~ wrote: »

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.

Ah sure that is grand so, once the match goes ahead eh?

If they have to train in small groups due to medical advice/public health rules then there shouldn't be 22 players on the pitch playing a match at the weekend.

niallo27

RasTa wrote: »

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

What's misleading about it, genuine question.

niallo27

Dave0301 wrote: »

Ah sure that is grand so, once the match goes ahead eh?

If they have to train in small groups due to medical advice/public health rules then there shouldn't be 22 players on the pitch playing a match at the weekend.

Yes but we are talking 2 or 3 months time, not next week.

joe_99

poppers wrote: »

Wouldnt like to be playing rugby on rock hard pitches in the summer.😖

They do water the pitches you know.

Dave0301

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but we are talking 2 or 3 months time, not next week.

The post I responded to said the following:

The training is in small groups BECAUSE you have to play a full match that week.

If they still have to do that in 2 months, then they shouldn't be playing football behind closed doors.

Loafing Oaf

Mitch Connor wrote: »

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

Yeah once the players have passed their pre-match test, I think you have to assume they are all clean and can grapple with/shadow each other the same way as they would in any high-level match. Otherwise what's the point?

gstack166

Don’t like the man personally, but he does raise some valid points here, I disagree with the voiding though, I feel the best way is to finish it as it is now position wise.

https://twitter.com/talksport/status/1255113965811761152?s=21

niallo27

Dave0301 wrote: »

The post I responded to said the following:



If they still have to do that in 2 months, then they shouldn't be playing football behind closed doors.

He saying it should be done as a precaution so only a few players could get infected rather than the whole team if they trained together

Iused2likebusts

Does simon jordan consider what will happen to all the footballers when they are told they will have no income till a vaccine is found and what the negative knock on effects of that might be.

gstack166

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

Does simon jordan consider what will happen to all the footballers when they are told they will have no income till a vaccine is found and what the negative knock on effects of that might be.

He wasn’t asked that question. He was asked what his opinion is on if/when football would be back in England & what does he think will happen to this season & gave his answer.

Guy:Incognito

joe_99 wrote: »

They do water the pitches you know.

Plus, Rugby League has been a summer league for years, its nothing new

Iused2likebusts

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

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

Absolutely. Hospital deaths falling is without a doubt positive trending. Hopefully it continues.

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

What's misleading about it, genuine question.

It's from the NHS website so I'd assume it's as accurate as you'll get anywhere.

davemckenna25

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

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

I wasn't comparing them to Irish figures.

I was discussing them as a standalone figure and commenting on the delay in reporting and how it affects the real time figures.

Iused2likebusts

gstack166 wrote: »

He wasn’t asked that question. He was asked what his opinion is on if/when football would be back in England & what does he think will happen to this season & gave his answer.

His point at the end was what happens when a player gets infected and it will happen until we get a vaccine and what do we do if somebody dies. So he is ultimately saying no football till a vaccine. He cant be saying cancel this season because somebody might die but you can kick off next season because somebody wont die then.

RasTa

niallo27 wrote: »

What's misleading about it, genuine question.

6 wrote: »

It's from the NHS website so I'd assume it's as accurate as you'll get anywhere.

Only reporting deaths of people who died in hospital and have confirmed to have the virus. Although I think that's changing from tomorrow.

Real deaths closer to 41k atm.

niallo27

If tests are fast and reliable and are done before every training session, then I could see this happening. If a player tests postive he is deemed injured until he tests negative. I know it all sounds simplistic but this is a multi billion pound industry it can be done.

Iused2likebusts

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

His point at the end was what happens when a player gets infected and it will happen until we get a vaccine and what do we do if somebody dies. So he is ultimately saying no football till a vaccine. He cant be saying cancel this season because somebody might die but you can kick off next season because somebody wont die then.

What if it takes 3 years to make one? Or 5? Or they can't make a vaccine? I wonder what Simon proposes then?

It's too black and white with some people who can't think outside the box. They need to figure out ways to work around it, the same way the rest of the world will.

niallo27

RasTa wrote: »

Only reporting deaths of people who died in hospital and have confirmed to have the virus. Although I think that's changing from tomorrow.

Real deaths closer to 41k atm.

That's fair enough but hospital deaths reducing is postive news, it's not misleading. It was clear in the post it was just hospital deaths.

RasTa

RasTa wrote: »

Only reporting deaths of people who died in hospital and have confirmed to have the virus. Although I think that's changing from tomorrow.

Real deaths closer to 41k atm.

So they haven't reported any of those figures yet then? So the figures reported is all people can go on

RasTa

6 wrote: »

So they haven't reported any of those figures yet then? So the figures reported is all people can go on

What?

MeMen2_MoRi_

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Yeah once the players have passed their pre-match test, I think you have to assume they are all clean and can grapple with/shadow each other the same way as they would in any high-level match. Otherwise what's the point?

If they've passed the "tests" before the match why enter the field/leave separately? I don't know the answer to that, more so on the leaving the pitch part after they've played 45/90mins of football.

On another note, zero mentioning of spitting/clearing the nose on the field? Or is that just obvious that it doesn't need to be said..

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

If tests are fast and reliable and are done before every training session, then I could see this happening. If a player tests postive he is deemed injured until he tests negative. I know it all sounds simplistic but this is a multi billion pound industry it can be done.

That'd be ideal. Doubt they'll have that many tests to begin with but who knows.

niallo27

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

If they've passed the "tests" before the match why enter the field/leave separately? I don't know the answer to that, more so on the leaving the pitch part after they've played 45/90mins of football.

On another note, zero mentioning of spitting/clearing the nose on the field? Or is that just obvious that it doesn't need to be said..

If they tested negative, why would it matter about spitting or anything like that.

MeMen2_MoRi_

niallo27 wrote: »

If they tested negative, why would it matter about spitting or anything like that.

If they've tested negative, why are they suggesting following social distancing with regards entering and leaving the field? Separate showering after games etc.. like you say they've "tested" negative.

MadYaker

niallo27 wrote: »

If tests are fast and reliable and are done before every training session, then I could see this happening. If a player tests postive he is deemed injured until he tests negative. I know it all sounds simplistic but this is a multi billion pound industry it can be done.

This just isn't possible. Testing is extremely limited and thats going to be the case for months. Sports are way down the priority list. Its not a question of money.

Rayne Wooney

Everything I’ve read references “English football” coming back, are they making the same effort to get the lower leagues back as they are the PL?

MeMen2_MoRi_

There's no mention of tests for LOI players, only mentioning looking out for symptoms/temperature. The only story I've seen about players being tested was Italy, for every test taken the clubs donate X amount of tests back into the healthcare system no idea if this is on the cards with EPL. No chance of that being a viable option for LOI clubs, they'll already be losing money having no fans coming through the gates.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/english-soccer/serie-a-clubs-to-donate-five-test-kits-for-every-one-they-use-1.4238230?mode=amp

Cantona's Collars

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Everything I’ve read references “English football” coming back, are they making the same effort to get the lower leagues back as they are the PL?

I'd doubt it,never mind the integrity of football this is all about money with the EPL.
Every other country has added the caveat that a resumption of football is down to government where in England it's suddenly the government want football back asap. It's as if they are being put under pressure.

Arghus

Coronavirus and football: Fifa medical chair does not want restart this season.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/52462233

MeMen2_MoRi_

The above article, doctor worrying about spitting.. niallo response "what does it matter" lol

Fitz*

There are 3 options to determine the final positions in France.

From what I can make out of these (my leaving cert pass level French is not helping me here), the options are;

1. Points Per Game to work out final positions.
2. Take the table as now as final
3. Take the table from having played each team once as final.

The relegation spots don't seem to be affected at all as the same 3 teams are involved in every scenario. The same applies to the top 4 positions. The only relevant changes to the table apply in positions 5&6.

https://twitter.com/ActuFoot_/status/1255140317965070344?s=19

stesaurus

FitzShane wrote: »

3. Take the table from having played each team once as final.

https://twitter.com/ActuFoot_/status/1255140317965070344?s=19

Interesting, I hadn't seen that type of scenario mentioned before. Anyone managed to work that out for the PL?

Fitz*

stesaurus wrote: »

Interesting, I hadn't seen that type of scenario mentioned before. Anyone managed to work that out for the PL?

The half way point would be

1. Liverpool
2. Leicester City
3. Man City
4. Chelsea
5. Wolves
6. Spurs
7. Sheffield United
8. Man United

There could be some issue with Liverpool playing someone twice before they played West Ham as that game was rearranged but I don't it would actually change anything as they won both games anyways.

MeMen2_MoRi_

FitzShane wrote: »

The half way point would be

1. Liverpool
2. Leicester City
3. Man City
4. Chelsea
5. Wolves
6. Spurs
7. Sheffield United
8. Man United

There could be some issue with Liverpool playing someone twice before they played West Ham as that game was rearranged but I don't it would actually change anything as they won both games anyways.

For the first half of the season for United that seems generous lol I'd take it and move onto the next season

Richard Hillman

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

There's no mention of tests for LOI players, only mentioning looking out for symptoms/temperature. The only story I've seen about players being tested was Italy, for every test taken the clubs donate X amount of tests back into the healthcare system no idea if this is on the cards with EPL. No chance of that being a viable option for LOI clubs, they'll already be losing money having no fans coming through the gates.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/english-soccer/serie-a-clubs-to-donate-five-test-kits-for-every-one-they-use-1.4238230?mode=amp

The LOI already has its European spots sorted and essentially have until next June to finish the current season.

The reason why everyone is rushing the decision to end their leagues is entirely on UEFA. They want the champions league to go on as close as normal and to fit in with Euro 2021. UEFA need cash flow to filter through to the associations, who can filter it through to the leagues. For all the attention people pay to Liverpool or Real Madrid etc, the associations are struggling, the leagues outside of the Top5 are struggling, even the big clubs.

UEFAs needs are paramount right now, as its benefits the most people.

RoryMac

FitzShane wrote: »

There are 3 options to determine the final positions in France.

From what I can make out of these (my leaving cert pass level French is not helping me here), the options are;

1. Points Per Game to work out final positions.
2. Take the table as now as final
3. Take the table from having played each team once as final.

The relegation spots don't seem to be affected at all as the same 3 teams are involved in every scenario. The same applies to the top 4 positions. The only relevant changes to the table apply in positions 5&6.

https://twitter.com/ActuFoot_/status/1255140317965070344?s=19

Points per game would be the fairest way to take into account any games in hand teams might have, I wonder could it be worked out as home and away number which could make it fairer again especially for teams in the bottom half

MeMen2_MoRi_

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The LOI already has its European spots sorted and essentially have until next June to finish the current season.

The reason why everyone is rushing the decision to end their leagues is entirely on UEFA. They want the champions league to go on as close as normal and to fit in with Euro 2021. UEFA need cash flow to filter through to the associations, who can filter it through to the leagues. For all the attention people pay to Liverpool or Real Madrid etc, the associations are struggling, the leagues outside of the Top5 are struggling, even the big clubs.

UEFAs needs are paramount right now, as its benefits the most people.

"Uefa needs are paramount right now"

My point of view will strongly differ from a game of football at this moment in time.

This whole nonsense of giving people a break from the boredom so we can watch a game of football being played out in an empty stadium is fairly funny..

What has happened to the game that "needs" the fans? This pandemic has created the need of TV is more important then what has gotten the game to this point, the fans..

I think, this is the moment where everyone takes stock that the game has passed everyone by, you may sit in the stands at every game but it's not your game anymore the game is beholden to TV..

I'll not be tuning into empty stadiums, a few players shouting and managers screaming their heads off on the sidelines.

Best of luck to UEFA''s needs being paramount.

Liberta Per Gli Ultra

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Everything I’ve read references “English football” coming back, are they making the same effort to get the lower leagues back as they are the PL?

This is a few weeks old but provides a detailed picture of the EFL situation:

'Clubs at every level are at risk' - the financial nightmare facing football (BBC Sport)

On 3 April, the Premier League agreed to advance £125m in payments to the EFL and National League, although only £2m of it will go to the 68 National League clubs.

In Leagues One and Two, the deadline for payment of April's wages is approaching and mass furloughing of players is being threatened. Meanwhile, in the Championship, business plans are under even greater strain than normal.

Of the 21 Championship clubs who competed in the EFL last season, the latest published accounts for five of them included parachute payments that came with relegation from the Premier League. In 13 instances out of the remaining 16, the club's wage bills exceeded their income.

It has been reported that in order to protect themselves, if agreement can not be found between individual clubs and the Professional Footballers' Association over wage cuts and deferrals, a "nuclear option" of all 24 clubs going into administration was being considered.

The_Kew_Tour

The FT has some very grim reading about the excess deaths in relation to the virus in UK

https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1255183452527374337?s=19

citytillidie

stesaurus wrote: »

Interesting, I hadn't seen that type of scenario mentioned before. Anyone managed to work that out for the PL?

I said they should count the table for 19 games played and where teams played twice to aggregate the scores and count that as one game as was laugh out of here. Ok maybe take the 2nd games out for those who played twice but count the 19 games

Mitch Connor

I would just leave it as is, essentially.

Its not fairer, or worse than going back to Match day 19. On the one hand that means everyone a played each other once. But you are still missing the fairness of home and away matches. What if one side had played City, Liverpool, Chelsea etc away from home, and another side player them all at home. Sure they played against the same sides, but there is massive context around that.

Without actually completing the league there is not fair way of deciding final places that will please everyone.
]I've neer been on board with the integrity talk, to be honest, I felt it was being thrown around to claim so moral high ground. But for anyone that does claim to care about integrity, I've no idea how you argue for anything at all at this point.

Points Per Game, doesn't account for fixture schedules - integrity?
Role back to game 19? So just forget about the 10 matches since then - integrity?
End season as is? Forget about the last 9 games - integrity?

Even where there is talk of finishing the season. Nuetral grounds (losing home advantage) and 5 subs? Would create a different context to all that matches than the previous 28/29 games, where is the sporting integrity in that? Also give clubs like City and Liverpool, who have greater squad numbers and higher quality on the bench an advantage over smaller clubs with smaller squads. (I don't think any club would be upset to see Andreas Pereira and Lingard come on as subs 4 and 5!)

I've no base issue with football returning - I'd love to see it back, but i do see a whole host of problems with every way you could bring it back, as well as every way you end it.

And also, I don't think calls of it being based on greed are fair either. Greed would have it about profit. As I see it football returning is about football surviving. I don't see wanting your business to survive this crisis as being greedy. I hope my bosses are doing all they can to keep my company going (I know they are), and I don't think that is greed on their part - so if if I don't think my boss is being greedy trying to keep the company alive I don't see why I should ascribe that mentality to Woodward or the PL bosses etc.

Richard Hillman

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

"Uefa needs are paramount right now"

My point of view will strongly differ from a game of football at this moment in time.

This whole nonsense of giving people a break from the boredom so we can watch a game of football being played out in an empty stadium is fairly funny..

What has happened to the game that "needs" the fans? This pandemic has created the need of TV is more important then what has gotten the game to this point, the fans..

I think, this is the moment where everyone takes stock that the game has passed everyone by, you may sit in the stands at every game but it's not your game anymore the game is beholden to TV..

I'll not be tuning into empty stadiums, a few players shouting and managers screaming their heads off on the sidelines.

Best of luck to UEFA''s needs being paramount.

The associations are getting hit hard and need cash to fund the grassroots of the game. So UEFA needs to generate cash Quickly.

Even look at the FA, probably the wealthiest of all the associations. The FA Cup looks like its done this year. That's revenue for 2 semi finals and a final at Wembley, 240,000 tickets at about 50 quid a pop. They lose Their England home games that they had planned, any concerts due to take place at Wembley. That's a lot of money for a non profit organisation that is there to fund the game. That money has already been allocated to whatever they are funding.

If they can get next season started by August, that would be great and everything can lead nicely to Euro2021

Mitch Connor

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

"Uefa needs are paramount right now"

My point of view will strongly differ from a game of football at this moment in time.

This whole nonsense of giving people a break from the boredom so we can watch a game of football being played out in an empty stadium is fairly funny..

What has happened to the game that "needs" the fans? This pandemic has created the need of TV is more important then what has gotten the game to this point, the fans..

I think, this is the moment where everyone takes stock that the game has passed everyone by, you may sit in the stands at every game but it's not your game anymore the game is beholden to TV..

I'll not be tuning into empty stadiums, a few players shouting and managers screaming their heads off on the sidelines.

Best of luck to UEFA''s needs being paramount.

If football was FTA and we didn't have TV contracts I think the arguments would be different.

The issue isn't so much that football doesn't need fans - it obviously does. But no matter what happens re. TV there will not be football with fans in the stadium any time soon. So there simply isn't the possibility of generating match day revenue in that way.

The other, huge (for some) revenue stream that they can look to protect is TV money. TV money will keep the lights on.

Clubs need money to survive, and the TV contracts will provide money as long as there is a product for the TV companies to pay out on.

I want football to return with full stadiums at some point, and I don't think that will be possible without playing behind closed doors first.

Chuck Noland

After the positive news from a few country’s the last few days here’s some not so good news as we await a potential lifting of restrictions from Leo

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-germanys-rate-of-covid-19-infections-grows-after-lockdown-eased-11980194

Mitch Connor

Chuck Noland wrote: »

After the positive news from a few country’s the last few days here’s some not so good news as we await a potential lifting of restrictions from Leo

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-germanys-rate-of-covid-19-infections-grows-after-lockdown-eased-11980194

The numbers will be based on data from 7 to 10 days ago, so prior to the restrictions being lifted.

However, anyone who thinks the rate of infection won't rise (and significantly) after the ending of lockdown is a moron.

Lockdown wasn't about irradicating the virus, it was about stretching the length of times infections would occur, hopefully reducing the number overall (as people will to a large extent continue to practice social distancing and isolation out of lockdown too) and building up capacity to deal with any predicted spikes.

Increases in daily cases should 100% be expected after the easing of restrictions.

Cantona's Collars

A potential spanner in the works for the restart of football in England?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/clubs-threaten-to-revolt-over-project-restart-gpsbzg55g

RasTa

https://twitter.com/johncrossmirror/status/1255234623799525377

Chuck Noland

RasTa wrote: »

https://twitter.com/johncrossmirror/status/1255234623799525377

If and this is a big if, multimillionaire footballers can get tested quicker then frontline medical staff in the NHS/HSE then society has failed.

RasTa

Yeah it won't sit well with many.