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

y0ssar1an22

wadacrack wrote: »

http://cphpost.dk/?p=113573

without reading it, if not peer reviewed it is not worth the paper its written on - its not as it turns out, it estimates how likely you are to be within 2m over 15 mins contact with another player in 90mins.
and compares that to the WHO baseline.

[the health authority] estimates that you have to be within two metres of a contagious person for over 15 minutes before contact is relevant,” Thomsen told Videnskab.dk.

“So there is no doubt that the time [1.5 minutes] noted in the research is not critical – particularly given that football is played outside.”

the problem is, you can be in contact with someone for 5 seconds and get it.

and using the WHO arbitrary figure of 2m for 15mins is also useless. see sentence above

Ohmeha

Bournemouth have announced one of the two new positive tests is one of their players

Cantona's Collars

The Mail.

"Chelsea are set to issue a social distancing warning to their first-team stars after Marcos Alonso and Kepa Arrizabalaga breached protocol to take pictures with fans."

NIMAN

So how many watched the Bundesliga this weekend?

Cantona's Collars

2 Championship players have tested positive.

Sky.

I'm surprised the amount of positive tests in the PL is so few. Thought it would be much higher this far out from start date. Hats off to them for the effort so far.

Lord TSC

I'm curious though.

The first 5 were all tested before training, right.

So, now we've got two more cases, but presumably they were tested originally and showed up negative? Then spent time training and then tested positive a few days latter? Be curious to see if the new duo passed it on, or if only a day or two of training wasn't enough to infect teammates.

8-10

NIMAN wrote: »

So how many watched the Bundesliga this weekend?

Yep really enjoying it, very close at the top!

Flicked between Dortmund game and Gladbach v Leverkusen first then the Bayern game

Not going to get to see any today but it's a fascinating league, lots of expansive and inventive football even from sides further down the table. Then you have the likes of Havertz, Haaland and Alphonso Davies who are worth watching just for how good they are at such a young age (all younger than Trent Alexander Arnold!)

CrabRevolution

Lord TSC wrote: »

I'm curious though.

The first 5 were all tested before training, right.

So, now we've got two more cases, but presumably they were tested originally and showed up negative? Then spent time training and then tested positive a few days latter? Be curious to see if the new duo passed it on, or if only a day or two of training wasn't enough to infect teammates.

I read on the BBC that each club got 10 more tests this time compared to the first round (50 vs 40). So it's possible (quite likely IMO) that the new positive cases were from the 10 additional people tested in each club who were skipped in the first round.

Cantona's Collars

Lord TSC wrote: »

I'm curious though.

The first 5 were all tested before training, right.

So, now we've got two more cases, but presumably they were tested originally and showed up negative? Then spent time training and then tested positive a few days latter? Be curious to see if the new duo passed it on, or if only a day or two of training wasn't enough to infect teammates.

With social distancing in training and players actually not really in contact with each other then the chance of passing it on would be virtually nil.
The cases should be low anyway with players as they were given strict rules to abide by even if a few couldn't. Easier to stay in lockdown in a luxury house or apartment than a tiny council flat plus even outside lockdown, footballers aren't usually spotted hanging around Tesco or getting a bus to the shops.
No need to congratulate them on low numbers of cases when it should be a given.

Mushy

The EFL confirmed 1014 tests were done on all players and staff from the 24 clubs. Only 2 positive results, which Hull have confirmed as from their club.

Sometimes it's hard not to believe the conspiracy theories (I dont, but its ridiculously coincidental).

Cantona's Collars

Mushy wrote: »

The EFL confirmed 1014 tests were done on all players and staff from the 24 clubs. Only 2 positive results, which Hull have confirmed as from their club.

Sometimes it's hard not to believe the conspiracy theories (I dont, but its ridiculously coincidental).

Even in the EPL it's been reported that Brighton players have asked the club to tone down the opposition to project restart as they want to do their talking on the pitch with integrity.

Mitch Connor

On the pl numbers, only 19 clubs tested in the first batch, 20th tested the day after the first results abd their first day numbers were included in this weekends report. Don't know if either of the new cases are from that club.

Lord TSC

Mitch Connor wrote: »

On the pl numbers, only 19 clubs tested in the first batch, 20th tested the day after the first results abd their first day numbers were included in this weekends report. Don't know if either of the new cases are from that club.

Afaik, Norwich were the team whose numbers weren't initially included.

Bournemouth are the team who have 1 of the 2 confirmed cases.

Mushy

They may as well just go back whole hog at it now, packed stadiums etc. Lockdown and government advice has been shown to be fierce flexible

Zebra3

Mushy wrote: »

The EFL confirmed 1014 tests were done on all players and staff from the 24 clubs. Only 2 positive results, which Hull have confirmed as from their club.

Sometimes it's hard not to believe the conspiracy theories (I dont, but its ridiculously coincidental).

Numbers should be very low.

Extremely fit, young, wealthy athletes.

If they followed guidelines correctly and stayed in their luxury homes, they should be grand.

wadacrack

Zebra3 wrote: »

Numbers should be very low.

Extremely fit, young, wealthy athletes.

If they followed guidelines correctly and stayed in their luxury homes, they should be grand.

That has nothing to do with contracting an a virus. They would have to still take the same risks going to a supermarket and we dont know their living arrangements

Mushy

Zebra3 wrote: »

Numbers should be very low.

Extremely fit, young, wealthy athletes.

If they followed guidelines correctly and stayed in their luxury homes, they should be grand.

Oh they should be. But even Hull fans are despairingly laughing that of the 2 cases to be positive, both happened to be from that 1 club, in a town with a low rate of infection (seemingly, I dont know if that bit is true)

Fitz*

Mushy wrote: »

Oh they should be. But even Hull fans are despairingly laughing that of the 2 cases to be positive, both happened to be from that 1 club, in a town with a low rate of infection (seemingly, I dont know if that bit is true)

I guess they could also be laughing at it as Hull have been very vocal about null & voiding about the season as they were on a horrible run of form since they sold their best player in January and looking like they will get relegated. Now they are the only club to report positive cases in the Championship.

Tin foil hat and all that but it is suspicious that the clubs to publicly report positive cases in the top 2 divisions in England since the universal testing have been in the same area in the table. The same clubs who were vocal about not restarting the leagues. Of course it could be just a coincidence...

Mushy

FitzShane wrote: »

I guess they could also be laughing at it as Hull have been very vocal about null & voiding about the season as they were on a horrible run of form since they sold their best player in January and looking like they will get relegated. Now they are the only club to report positive cases in the Championship.

Tin foil hat and all that but it is suspicious that the clubs to publicly report positive cases in the top 2 divisions in England since the universal testing have been in the same area in the table. The same clubs who were vocal about not restarting the leagues. Of course it could be just a coincidence...

Oh the fans were laughing, but more in disbelief.

And yeah, the tin foil hat I agree fully on. Wouldnt put it past clubs either

Zebra3

wadacrack wrote: »

That has nothing to do with contracting an a virus. They would have to still take the same risks going to a supermarket and we dont know their living arrangements

I doubt many wealthy footballers do their shopping, and I doubt many share their homes with a load of randomers like many of those from poorer backgrounds who were more susceptible to the virus.

Anyway, ten minutes in a supermarket with good social distancing is high unlikely to get someone infected.

Mitch Connor

Zebra3 wrote: »

I doubt many wealthy footballers do their shopping, and I doubt many share their homes with a load of randomers like many of those from poorer backgrounds who were more susceptible to the virus.

Anyway, ten minutes in a supermarket with good social distancing is high unlikely to get someone infected.

but the point remains that being young and fit would make zero difference to contracting the virus.

Agent Coulson

Johnson announced outdoor markets will start to open on June 1st and non-essential shops can start to open from June 15th.


So there is a good guide for football restarting.

RollieFingers

https://www.football365.com/news/tom-cleverley-watford-ridiculous-nonsense-premier-league-return-dean-ashton

Bit of an odd take from Ashton there, can't really see anything that Cleverley said that is nonsense? Respects every individuals decision but wanted to return to training to see how things worked.

Corholio

Aaron Ramsdale was the Bournemouth player who tested positive for Covid-19. He tested positive on Friday morning after previously testing negative on Monday. He believes he picked it up in the supermarket.

Guy:Incognito

Im amazed clubs are so loose with what players do. Yes, I get they are people and all, but I'd have thought at the first sniff of football coming back theyd have said to players "look, we dont want you doing stuff like going to the shops, its too risky" and organised club staff to do shopping for them if the stores delivery services werent available. Even for their own sakes, Id have thought they wouldnt want the risk of fans seeing them in shops and coming up to them.

wadacrack

Zebra3 wrote: »

I doubt many wealthy footballers do their shopping, and I doubt many share their homes with a load of randomers like many of those from poorer backgrounds who were more susceptible to the virus.

Anyway, ten minutes in a supermarket with good social distancing is high unlikely to get someone infected.

Bournemouth GK believes he contracted it in a supermarket. Your making alot of presumptions. Their are 4 professional leagues in England. Not all players are on a big wage

Fr Tod Umptious

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Im amazed clubs are so loose with what players do. Yes, I get they are people and all, but I'd have thought at the first sniff of football coming back theyd have said to players "look, we dont want you doing stuff like going to the shops, its too risky" and organised club staff to do shopping for them if the stores delivery services werent available. Even for their own sakes, Id have thought they wouldnt want the risk of fans seeing them in shops and coming up to them.

The question is where do you draw the line.

Does everyone that is required to have a match behind closed doors (players, coaches, stadium staff) self isolate from now until the season gets restarted and finished or do they get as much freedom as anyone else ?

The former is impossible the latter might result in more positive tests and a delay to getting the season restarted and finished.

fyfe79

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The question is where do you draw the line.

Does everyone that is required to have a match behind closed doors (players, coaches, stadium staff) self isolate from now until the season gets restarted and finished or do they get as much freedom as anyone else ?

The former is impossible the latter might result in more positive tests and a delay to getting the season restarted and finished.

I would think there'll be some kind of reasonable compromise. If the clubs are testing on Friday before a Saturday game, the expectation on the players will be that they don't go to the supermarket on the Saturday morning, and will essentially isolate from the point of the test to the point of meeting up for the game. What they do after the game is up to them, within government guidelines obviously. By the time of the Monday test, the club will then be able to say with confidence that, if the player tests positive, he didn't pick it up during the game.

8-10

In case you haven't noticed, Dortmund are at home to Bayern Munich at 5.30pm today (BT Sport)

League Table:

Bayern Munich - 61pts
Borussia Dortmund - 57pts
RB Leipzig - 54pts
Bayer Leverkusen - 53pts
Monchengladbach - 52pts

A win for Dortmund would open things up at the top. Leverkusen also playing well and play at 7.30. They have a home game v Bayern at the end of next week so would be good to see them keep the pressure on.

Cantona's Collars

Mushy wrote: »

They may as well just go back whole hog at it now, packed stadiums etc. Lockdown and government advice has been shown to be fierce flexible

Dominic Cummings would have no problems going to away games.

5starpool

Isn't there only like an 80% accuracy on any of these tests in the first place, meaning that any testing is essentially just window dressing?

Amirani

5starpool wrote: »

Isn't there only like an 80% accuracy on any of these tests in the first place, meaning that any testing is essentially just window dressing?

It's a bit more nuanced than that. They have very high specificity, like 99% or something. But their sensitivity is more like 70-80%.

There are considerations to made made for pre-test probabilities, but what it means in practice is that positive results are generally always correct, but negative results less so. There's a high false negative rate, but a low false positive rate. About 20-30% of "negatives" won't be actual negatives.

So in essence what you say is correct, the testing is window dressing a bit, as you can't really count on the negatives being accurate.

~Rebel~

Amirani wrote: »

It's a bit more nuanced than that. They have very high specificity, like 99% or something. But their sensitivity is more like 70-80%.

There are considerations to made made for pre-test probabilities, but what it means in practice is that positive results are generally always correct, but negative results less so. There's a high false negative rate, but a low false positive rate. About 20-30% of "negatives" won't be actual negatives.

So in essence what you say is correct, the testing is window dressing a bit, as you can't really count on the negatives being accurate.

Which I think is the reason for very regular testing, right? As the odds of two false negatives for the same person are very low.

Amirani

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Which I think is the reason for very regular testing, right? As the odds of two false negatives for the same person are very low.

Again, it depends on the pre-test probabilities, but you're correct.

It's a bit of a counter-intuitive concept but:

If you were to test a nurse that was somewhat symptomatic, and they had 2 consecutive negative tests, then the post-test probability that they have the disease may still be over 50%.

Footballers, particularly ones not showing symptoms, have much lower pre-test probabilities and hence consecutive negative tests would have much more validity.

The accuracy of tests depends on the population you're testing.

Cantona's Collars

La Liga will have prerecorded crowd noise at games. At least it will lend some atmosphere to the games.

CSF

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

La Liga will have prerecorded crowd noise at games. At least it will lend some atmosphere to the games.

I think it’s gonna be weirder with fake noise than none, but sure let’s see how it works when it happens.

Cantona's Collars

CSF wrote: »

I think it’s gonna be weirder with fake noise than none, but sure let’s see how it works when it happens.

Anyone who plays PES or FIFA will be used to random background chants and crowd noise.
Better than the periods of silence punctuated by cavernous echoes imo.

Liam O

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Anyone who plays PES or FIFA will be used to random background chants and crowd noise.
Better than the periods of silence punctuated by cavernous echoes imo.

Yeah but they matched with what is on screen due to the scripting of the games. If it's just going to be a continuous hum I guess that's ok but it would be distracting if there was a huge roar out of place to what is happening on the pitch. Or the wrong button is pressed and there's boos after a goal or something

ArmaniJeanss

Is it feasible to have say 300 home fans and 70 away fans watching it live from home and their responses get transmitted to us.

I can see issues obviously (the guy who shouts 'fcuk off xxxxx you paedo cnut' at a quiet moment) but is it technically possible within the limits of broadcast delay?

Guy:Incognito

Why bother? If having crowd noises is so important to people, just use recordings of old matches to fit it more or less to whats going on.

Cantona's Collars

So long as it's not fooking vuvuzela's it'll be grand.

sideswipe

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

La Liga will have prerecorded crowd noise at games. At least it will lend some atmosphere to the games.

Could they not get all the fans from around the world onto a giant Zoom call and connect it to the sound system, we can shout away and be heard in the stadium?

Maybe somebody could invent an app that you put on during the match which collects live fan feedback. Feck it I'm going to invent it now and sell it for millions, i'll be rich I tells ya

Alexa, call the ref a wanker.

Agent Coulson

The Lyon president is shouting very loudly that Ligue 1 was ended too soon when you see the rest of the major leagues restarting and they should reconsider that decision and wants the French PM to look at it again.

Guy:Incognito

The decision by France and Holland to jump in to the Sept 1st thing was silly. There was no need to decide on a date that far out so quickly. Play it be ear and see how things pan out was the best approach.

5starpool

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

La Liga will have prerecorded crowd noise at games. At least it will lend some atmosphere to the games.

In the Bernabeu they can connect some white cloth to electric fans and turn them on when losing to add that bit of authenticity to proceedings.

DM_7

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The Lyon president is shouting very loudly that Ligue 1 was ended too soon when you see the rest of the major leagues restarting and they should reconsider that decision and wants the French PM to look at it again.

Why do you think Lyon are annoyed the season ended early? I think it might be something to do with their league positon at the end.

I think all leagues can't be treated the same so what happened elsewhere is not a reason to change the suitable path for that country.

All that said it is the legal challenge that may be taken that is most interesting.

Fitz*

DM_7 wrote: »

Why do you think Lyon are annoyed the season ended early? I think it might be something to do with their league positon at the end.

I think all leagues can't be treated the same so what happened elsewhere is not a reason to change the suitable path for that country.

All that said it is the legal challenge that may be taken that is most interesting.

Apparently a lot of their top players have low release clauses that come into play if the club does not have Champions League football, which will happen based on the current rulings.

fyfe79

FitzShane wrote: »

Apparently a lot of their top players have low release clauses that come into play if the club does not have Champions League football, which will happen based on the current rulings.

They're also arguing a good point that no league football will damage their, and PSG's, current Champions League campaign. Lyon are in a good position to progress.

~Rebel~

sideswipe wrote: »

Could they not get all the fans from around the world onto a giant Zoom call and connect it to the sound system, we can shout away and be heard in the stadium?

Maybe somebody could invent an app that you put on during the match which collects live fan feedback. Feck it I'm going to invent it now and sell it for millions, i'll be rich I tells ya

Alexa, call the ref a wanker.

Alas it was discussed on here a month or more ago, so you may face challenges on your patent claim! :P

The tricky bit is delay - if you try to play fan feedback in the stadium, it would be this really weird out-of-phase time loop, where something happens on the field, then between 30 seconds and 2 or 3 minutes later you react to it on your delayed feed, then this even more delayed reaction plays out in the stadium confusing the bejesus out of the players - so that's a bit of a no-go.

You could perhaps do it on more of a fan-to-fan basis, where fans would hear each others reactions, but again the timing aspect if tricky. And it also wouldn't sound like crowd noise... you'd have relative silence through the bulk of the match, and then sudden extremely loud barks of pure noise whenever something big happened.

Going down this road, about the best bet might be someone like Sky actively setting up a live-link for a few hundred locals, season ticket holders etc for each club, and just capturing their reactions/noises live (or very close to it) to then go out on their feed. But even with that it might not actually sound great... if you want crowd noise, the fake noise thing they're doing as a Bundesliga option is probably about as good as it gets.