How much do you miss the pub?

Leroy42

ShyMets wrote: »

Opening up all pubs on a certain would also potentially lessen demand. Punters would have a lot more choice and opposed to trying to get to get into a smaller number of pubs

Not less demand, just less queues.

And it is the pub that need to limit the number of people so it isn't really an issue.

Having these strict conditions will limit demand, the alternative is a full return and we can see from the rush to get back to Penneys, Ikea etc how that would potentially go.

ShyMets

Leroy42 wrote: »

Not less demand, just less queues.

And it is the pub that need to limit the number of people so it isn't really an issue.

Having these strict conditions will limit demand, the alternative is a full return and we can see from the rush to get back to Penneys, Ikea etc how that would potentially go.

I suppose its the logic I'm questioning. Currently we're being told its safe to open pubs that serve food on the 29th June. But its not safe for the remaining pubs to open until 20th July.

Surely it either safe to open pubs or it isn't

El Weirdo

bucketybuck wrote: »

Are you referring to the 2 women who legally entered the country to visit their dying mother, went into quarantine but showed no symptoms and were granted special exemption to go her before she died, unfortunately she died before they could reach her and they were only able to attend the funeral but during the entire visit the only person they had direct contact with was another family member?

Is that what you mean when you say two people "escaped" quarantine?

Hmmm.

But the health ministry has now been forced to admit that the women had, in fact, met up with friends early in their journey to get directions after they got lost leaving Auckland. The pair had “limited physical contact” with two friends for up to five minutes, a statement just released by the ministry says.

stephenjmcd

Leroy42 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the closures themselves, the last 12 weeks were not required?

I agree with you. I think the pubs should remain closed until 20 July, which it appears what you are arguing for.

No date marks a specific end of course, but points have to be chosen. Would 19th, or 21st mean any difference, probably not.

Where is it suggested that they weren't required? Of course they were.

I've no issues with anywhere looking to open up in restaurant style for 3 weeks, if they can do it then fire away and best of luck, I'll probably head out for a meal and I agree in proper restaurant style 2hr block bookings.

What i think is complete non sense is the suggestion that you can be at 1m for 90 minutes and then be told out you go. Thats going to lead to organised pub crawls when pubs reopen as pubs in July. Surely that's a bad thing?

Would they not rather the same people be sat at the table getting table service from say 9 until last orders 12.30 than after 90 minutes everyone ups and goes to another pub, hence cross containination on a wider scale.

AdamD

Leroy42 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the closures themselves, the last 12 weeks were not required?

I agree with you. I think the pubs should remain closed until 20 July, which it appears what you are arguing for.

No date marks a specific end of course, but points have to be chosen. Would 19th, or 21st mean any difference, probably not.

Why? What's your reasoning? Do they suddenly become safer then? Our cases are unlikely to drop much further, they've pretty much bottomed out.

The only possible logic would be to see whether restaurants cause a spike in the 3 weeks leading up to it, but then again they're very much arguing that restaurants are uncomparable to pubs so again, why is July 20th safer?

Leroy42

ShyMets wrote: »

I suppose its the logic I'm questioning. Currently we're being told its safe to open pubs that serve food on the 29th June. But its not safe for the remaining pubs to open until 20th July.

Surely it either safe to open pubs or it isn't

The serving food is because they are effectively opening them up as restaurants. Remember that originally pubs were not going to open at all until July, it was only after discussions that it was agreed on this approach.

THey are deliberately set up like this because in essence it isn't a pub reopening, its a restaurant that serves draught.

Set tables, limited seating time, main meal. Sounds very lunch like a restaurant to me. Those complaining about it simply have to wait a further 3 weeks and everything will be back to normal (on the basis of the Covid numbers staying low).

This is a compromise by the authorities to allow some pubs to at least partially reopen. I think it is a good idea. It gives us a view of the likely outcome of a full return with the chance to cut it if needs be if things start to go wrong in terms of Covid cases.

I think the main confusion is that many seem to be thinking that pubs are reopening on 29th June. While technically true, as in the doors will open, the pub as it was pre lockdown will not be open until at least 20 July (and will be very much dependent on the restrictions in place)

bucketybuck

El Weirdo wrote: »

Hmmm.

And? What does that later information change?

They didn't escape anything, they had less than the advised 15min contact with another person, the govt has full contact tracing of their movements, it must be the most polite and well documented "escape" in history.

El Weirdo

stephenjmcd wrote: »

What i think is complete non sense is the suggestion that you can be at 1m for 90 minutes and then be told out you go. Thats going to lead to organised pub crawls when pubs reopen as pubs in July. Surely that's a bad thing?

Is that actually being suggested?

Benimar

AdamD wrote: »

Why? What's your reasoning? Do they suddenly become safer then? Our cases are unlikely to drop much further, they've pretty much bottomed out.

The only possible logic would be to see whether restaurants cause a spike in the 3 weeks leading up to it, but then again they're very much arguing that restaurants are uncomparable to pubs so again, why is July 20th safer?

I think its actually the other way round. If there is no spike from restaurants opening, but there is from pubs opening, then they only need to shut the pubs back down. Not hotels and restaurants as well.

If they all open together and there is a spike, then they could end up having to shut all three.

Leroy42

AdamD wrote: »

Why? What's your reasoning? Do they suddenly become safer then? Our cases are unlikely to drop much further, they've pretty much bottomed out.

The only possible logic would be to see whether restaurants cause a spike in the 3 weeks leading up to it, but then again they're very much arguing that restaurants are uncomparable to pubs so again, why is July 20th safer?

Bingo. Restaurants are set up for more more SD than pubs, by their very nature. The thinking is that opening up restaurants would be less risky than opening pubs and as such pubs were set to reopen later.

Pubs argued that actually they could operate as a restaurant, and in that case the risk was the same so the authorities accepted their claim and allowed them to reopen.

But to reopen as a restaurant. They are not reopening as a pub.

It is a phased reopening, seeing the impact of one before moving to another. It is about reducing risk against the tradeoff with a return to normality.

Check out states in the US to see the effects of bad reopening policy. They will likely have a second shutdown, or at the very least a second wave (although debatable whether they ever left the 1st wave).

Are you really wiling to risk that for three weeks?

Leroy42

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Where is it suggested that they weren't required? Of course they were.

I've no issues with anywhere looking to open up in restaurant style for 3 weeks, if they can do it then fire away and best of luck, I'll probably head out for a meal and I agree in proper restaurant style 2hr block bookings.

What i think is complete non sense is the suggestion that you can be at 1m for 90 minutes and then be told out you go. Thats going to lead to organised pub crawls when pubs reopen as pubs in July. Surely that's a bad thing?

Would they not rather the same people be sat at the table getting table service from say 9 until last orders 12.30 than after 90 minutes everyone ups and goes to another pub, hence cross containination on a wider scale.

Some people are going to do this, there is always some. But the vast majority of people are not going to book tables, pay for food, and get kicked out after 90 minutes only to walk to the next pub and do it all again.

The 90 minutes is aimed at given everyone a chance to go, rather than a few groups hogging the tables.

Harry Palmr

If masks are strongly recommended for shopping and using public transport will there be same for pubs and restaurants?

How is this going to work? Does Covid 19 behave differently if you're having the craic.

ixoy

Harry Palmr wrote: »

If masks are strongly recommended for shopping and using public transport will there be same for pubs and restaurants?

How is this going to work? Does Covid 19 behave differently if you're having the craic.

It's because you're moving around more when you're in a shopping centre I guess and risk exposing more people.
In a restaurant/bar you'll be in the one place, with your group and separated from other groups so you're not mixing with as many people. The churn of people is a lot smaller.

Busi_Girl08

Just a thought, will pubs be limited on their opening hours? If they're allowed to open on the proviso they're serving food (and I presume have a restaurant license), surely the regular later opening hours wouldn't apply?

stephenjmcd

Leroy42 wrote: »

Some people are going to do this, there is always some. But the vast majority of people are not going to book tables, pay for food, and get kicked out after 90 minutes only to walk to the next pub and do it all again.

The 90 minutes is aimed at given everyone a chance to go, rather than a few groups hogging the tables.

Like I said it works while they operate as restaurants for the 3 weeks. Different story come 20th July.

90 minutes have your pints in one pub and then into the pub down the road, this is without the food requirement. Thats not logical really. Book your table in the pub after 20th July from say 9 to close or 10 to close whatever it may be and stick to the rules of table service etc. Saying after 90 minutes you've to leave brings you in more contact with more people in the next pub.

Like I say and you've said it too it works while they're in restaurant style 100%, it's after 20th July where I dont think the 90 minute piece works

stephenjmcd

El Weirdo wrote: »

Is that actually being suggested?

at the moment yes, the suggestion is 1m distancing for a 90 minute stay. After 20th July you'll just book a table in another pub then once your original 90 is up.

It all makes sense while in restaurant style from 29th for the 3 weeks

Harry Palmr

ixoy wrote: »

It's because you're moving around more when you're in a shopping centre I guess and risk exposing more people.
In a restaurant/bar you'll be in the one place, with your group and separated from other groups so you're not mixing with as many people. The churn of people is a lot smaller.

Yeah cos that's how pubs work. The staff will have to move about, people will need to enter and leave, toilet breaks will be a challenge that's for sure! If someone coughs the place could go into a panic - or at least suddenly go very quiet.

I wouldn't care if pubs never opened again.

stephenjmcd

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

Just a thought, will pubs be limited on their opening hours? If they're allowed to open on the proviso they're serving food (and I presume have a restaurant license), surely the regular later opening hours wouldn't apply?

Yes from my understanding from my local for 3 weeks they'll operate as per their standard food serving hours. Kitchen closes 10pm

ShyMets

Deleted User wrote: »

I wouldn't care if pubs never opened again.

We haven't had of those comments for a while:)

freak scence

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Sunday 19th July, I'll have 2 pints with my carvery please. Monday 20th, well thats all changed, I'll just have a pint please.

As if by magic 24hrs everything changes

3 weeks to see if virus spikes

castletownman

The irony is, its kind of encouraging binge drinking. The very thing that anti-drink campaigners (among which is Dr.Tony) are so vehemently against.

I may skull my last couple of pints as the clock is ticking towards 80 minutes, because as soon as it reaches 90 minutes I am at greater risk of catching the virus.

And there's no guarantee either that rotating tables will be as profitable as planned. What if a group of say, four lads who are meeting up for the first time since March, buy the €9 meal along with four or five pints each, but the next couple of groups at the table are a bit more 'frugal' and only have tap water to go with one-course? I bet that is quite common too.

Chalk McHugh

Just talkin to a pal of mine who runs a pub in the north inner city and he says their working on their own special homemade 'Vaccine Soup' and the only thing it will be preventing is the regulars leaving the boozer without being flutered first. Roll on the 29th lads it's party time

ThewhiteJesus

Chalk McHugh wrote: »

Just talkin to a pal of mine who runs a pub in the north inner city and he says their working on their own special homemade 'Vaccine Soup' and the only thing it will be preventing is the regulars leaving the boozer without being flutered first. Roll on the 29th lads it's party time

8 pints in two hours an acceptable challenge ?

Chalk McHugh

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

8 pints in two hours an acceptable challenge ?

Thats a warm up. The 2nd two hours we move onto the hard stuff. All are welcome. It's not for the feint hearted this shop but a good time will be had by all.

undertaker fan 88

Chalk McHugh wrote: »

Thats a warm up. The 2nd two hours we move onto the hard stuff. All are welcome. It's not for the feint hearted this shop but a good time will be had by all.

And when the hse walk in and shut him down will it still be a good time

Chalk McHugh

undertaker fan 88 wrote: »

And when the hse walk in and shut him down will it still be a good time

No it wont. Especially for the HSE when the doors are locked behind them and there's no way out.

ThewhiteJesus

undertaker fan 88 wrote: »

And when the hse walk in and shut him down will it still be a good time

haha trust me this will never happen, the rules will apply to the big hipster pubs here in dublin, for all other normal locals it'll be business as usual within a week,
the oul wink and elbow language of delight

undertaker fan 88

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

haha trust me this will never happen, the rules will apply to the big hipster pubs here in dublin, for all other normal locals it'll be business as usual within a week,
the oul wink and elbow language of delight

They have hired alot more to check bars and I work in a local and the guards have already told us they will be checking and if we dont stick to rules were closed

hynesie08

So is there anything to stop me booking a table for 4 from 3—4.30, then the other 3 members of my group booking the next 3 slots??? Obviously I wouldn't be paying for 4 substantial meals so it's not for me, but could you?

undertaker fan 88

hynesie08 wrote: »

So is there anything to stop me booking a table for 4 from 3—4.30, then the other 3 members of my group booking the next 3 slots??? Obviously I wouldn't be paying for 4 substantial meals so it's not for me, but could you?

All 4 sitting at the table at 3 need order a meal. Same for each slot. Bars are ment open as restaurants for 3weeks that's the issue it's not a case of going out for your 7 or 8 pints that's from july 20th if you wish. But at the moment its restaurant rules . I am not looking forward to it

LeeroyJ.

Not at all, but I miss my Barber more than anything else in my life.

stephenjmcd

hynesie08 wrote: »

So is there anything to stop me booking a table for 4 from 3—4.30, then the other 3 members of my group booking the next 3 slots??? Obviously I wouldn't be paying for 4 substantial meals so it's not for me, but could you?

If you wanted a load of food then technically yes.

But if 4 of you booked a table in different slots in the same pub from 20th July don't see what would stop that.

hynesie08

stephenjmcd wrote: »

If you wanted a load of food then technically yes.

But if 4 of you booked a table in different slots in the same pub from 20th July don't see what would stop that.

I was thinking of sports bars that do food, 90 minutes isn't good for football, so we'd need to book 2 slots at least...... Might have to do it for Liverpool/city

undertaker fan 88

hynesie08 wrote: »

I was thinking of sports bars that do food, 90 minutes isn't good for football, so we'd need to book 2 slots at least...... Might have to do it for Liverpool/city

90 mins be out the window by july 20th. As by then you dont need buy food to go for a pint. But if before then you book 2 slots you need buy 2 meals as per rule at moment

hynesie08

undertaker fan 88 wrote: »

90 mins be out the window by july 20th. As by then you dont need buy food to go for a pint. But if before then you book 2 slots you need buy 2 meals as per rule at moment

Large Chicken wings first half, nachos second half, I will take that bullet......

ThewhiteJesus

undertaker fan 88 wrote: »

They have hired alot more to check bars and I work in a local and the guards have already told us they will be checking and if we dont stick to rules were closed

how do you feel yourself about going back if you don't mind me asking ?
I've worked through it in an office so nothing changed for me,
but for a barman(i was one once) who's been at home for a few months, to come back and serve booze and collect their glasses ect, are you worried at all ?
I remember how hard it was to get people out at closing time

undertaker fan 88

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

how do you feel yourself about going back if you don't mind me asking ?
I've worked through it in an office so nothing changed for me,
but for a barman(i was one once) who's been at home for a few months, to come back and serve booze and collect their glasses ect, are you worried at all ?
I remember how hard it was to get people out at closing time

I'm looking forward to the being back working aspect. But dealing with people if they dont want to listen I'm not looking forward to. Regulars are going to be a disaster.

bucketybuck

Pubs can't get people to leave when its 4 in the morning and they have turned all the lights off, how exactly are they going to manage booting people out every 90 minutes?

Again, its all theatre, a load of bollocks and more fool the pub that tries to enforce those rules, they will be in a minority.

undertaker fan 88

bucketybuck wrote: »

Pubs can't get people to leave when its 4 in the morning and they have turned all the lights off, how exactly are they going to manage booting people out every 90 minutes?

Again, its all theatre, a load of bollocks and more fool the pub that tries to enforce those rules, they will be in a minority.

The issue for the first 3 weeks in which the 90 mins are for is we wont be pubs. We are restaurants for that time and have to either enforce the rules or stay closed until the 20th of July

Utopia Parkway

Surely the 90 minute thing will just force people from pub to pub to pub whereas it might actually be safer from a health perspective if they settled in one pub for the evening rather than going to three or four.

undertaker fan 88

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Surely the 90 minute thing will just force people from pub to pub to pub whereas it might actually be safer from a health perspective if they settled in one pub for the evening rather than going to three or four.

The 90 min thing at the moment is because pubs are opening as restaurants. Unless everyone is having dinner in each pub they go to they wont be drinking. I reckon 90 mins is out the window come 20th of july

SEPT 23 1989

So each pub will have a Covid 19 warden wearing a green hi vis vest operating a card system

If you break the 2m rule for the first it's a yellow for your second offence you are asked to leave the premises

Cork Boy 53

Leroy42 wrote: »

Bingo. Restaurants are set up for more more SD than pubs, by their very nature. The thinking is that opening up restaurants would be less risky than opening pubs and as such pubs were set to reopen later.

Pubs argued that actually they could operate as a restaurant, and in that case the risk was the same so the authorities accepted their claim and allowed them to reopen.

But to reopen as a restaurant. They are not reopening as a pub.

It is a phased reopening, seeing the impact of one before moving to another. It is about reducing risk against the tradeoff with a return to normality.

Check out states in the US to see the effects of bad reopening policy. They will likely have a second shutdown, or at the very least a second wave (although debatable whether they ever left the 1st wave).

Are you really wiling to risk that for three weeks?

Clearly many of the I don`t give a **** brigade are.

joeguevara

Firstly, all of this is guidelines and in essence are not enforceable by anyone, unless they are written into Legislation and provide police powers.

Notwithstanding that, all the information so far is that pubs must have the capability to serve these meals, but there hasn't been any concrete evidence that will require people to buy them. Ability to serve food is what allows them to open. It would actually be illegal to demand that someone purchases one, once they are in there.

Finally, im a bit confused when I hear that Police have been around to pubs to tell them what they will be doing and they will be closed if food isn't sold for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the guidelines haven't been published. Secondly, they are only guidelines and thirdly majority of pubs are closed so how are the police going around them.

ChikiChiki

I get a sense that in their excitement, some posters have not thought through the reality of a socially distanced pub. Its great that they are back but the novelty will wear off after a few weeks with all the frustrations and inconveniences that come with this new normal.

Cant wait for a coupe of pints of plain all the same. The cans just don't cut it.

Tenzor07

undertaker fan 88 wrote: »

The issue for the first 3 weeks in which the 90 mins are for is we wont be pubs. We are restaurants for that time and have to either enforce the rules or stay closed until the 20th of July

Yea exactly, gastro pubs/pubs with restaurant licenses and then 3 weeks later all other Pubs.
Makes sense for a Restaurant with limited space due to the 2m distance, maybe even 1m distance when that becomes official will want to accommodate as many of their customers as possible, so everyone get a fair chance at getting a table.. It's not designed for people who are only there for the alcohol. Wait until 20th of July.

Cork Boy 53

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I get a sense that in their excitement, some posters have not thought through the reality of a socially distanced pub. Its great that they are back but the novelty will wear off after a few weeks with all the frustrations and inconveniences that come with this new normal.

Well if they want to go to a pub, or anywhere else for that matter, until such time as a vaccine or treatment for the virus is developed and while the regulations remain in place they will just have to adjust to the new normal. Simple as that.

Tenzor07

joeguevara wrote: »

Firstly, all of this is guidelines and in essence are not enforceable by anyone, unless they are written into Legislation and provide police powers.
Notwithstanding that, all the information so far is that pubs must have the capability to serve these meals, but there hasn't been any concrete evidence that will require people to buy them. Ability to serve food is what allows them to open. It would actually be illegal to demand that someone purchases one, once they are in there.
Finally, im a bit confused when I hear that Police have been around to pubs to tell them what they will be doing and they will be closed if food isn't sold for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the guidelines haven't been published. Secondly, they are only guidelines and thirdly majority of pubs are closed so how are the police going around them.

I believe you are wrong there, if the Gardai find that a pub is not compliant with the Restaurant licensing act then they have the power to shut it down..
So no pub owners will want to risk loosing that.

joeguevara

Tenzor07 wrote: »

I believe you are wrong there, if the Gardai find that a pub is not compliant with the Restaurant licensing act then they have the power to shut it down..
So no pub owners will want to risk loosing that.

How would they not be compliant with the restaurant licensing act if what is published is guidelines and not legislation. And secondly, is there anything in the restaurant licensing act that requires a person to purchase a meal, or is it simply that meals must be offered for it to be considered a restaurant.

Put it this way, if I went into a restaurant and wanted a salad for 3 euro and a glass of wine, that does not breach the restaurant licensing act.