| bang goes oct then on 12:05 - Sep 23 with 2820 views | Antti_Heinola |
| bang goes oct then on 10:08 - Sep 23 by francisbowles |
I'd rather have it on a stream than not at all. |
me too.
It was much worse when there was nothing at all. And games recently have been pretty good I think. Plenty of goals.
Banning fans, though, is all about optics. I was at a market at the weekend and it was RAMMED. Some with masks, but many not as they were eating. All outdoors etc, but how can that be ok, but even 3000 properly spaced at a foiotball ground not be? It's because they allowed sport to continue last time and they're sensitive to criticism. As always with this shower running the country, it's completely reactive. |  |
|  |
| bang goes oct then on 12:46 - Sep 23 with 2744 views | danehoop |
Apparently Grouse shooting is still OK. |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| bang goes oct then on 12:46 - Sep 23 with 2739 views | daveB |
| bang goes oct then on 12:05 - Sep 23 by Antti_Heinola |
me too.
It was much worse when there was nothing at all. And games recently have been pretty good I think. Plenty of goals.
Banning fans, though, is all about optics. I was at a market at the weekend and it was RAMMED. Some with masks, but many not as they were eating. All outdoors etc, but how can that be ok, but even 3000 properly spaced at a foiotball ground not be? It's because they allowed sport to continue last time and they're sensitive to criticism. As always with this shower running the country, it's completely reactive. |
They said today it is due to getting to the grounds and going to pubs etc afterwards even though the public transport is open and supposedly safe as are pubs.So you can get the tube to the Bush and watch the football in the pub with your bubble but not in the stadium. Insert swear words here |  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 12:48 - Sep 23 with 2735 views | daveB |
| bang goes oct then on 10:08 - Sep 23 by francisbowles |
I'd rather have it on a stream than not at all. |
You are probably right and I would miss it, I'll probably feel different in a few days but feeling really down about this all now. | | | |
| bang goes oct then on 13:51 - Sep 23 with 2628 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| bang goes oct then on 12:46 - Sep 23 by danehoop |
Apparently Grouse shooting is still OK. |
If the grouse don’t play ball, then maybe use some of the fringe players from Forest’s squad instead. |  |
| |
| bang goes oct then on 14:04 - Sep 23 with 2595 views | Cliff |
| bang goes oct then on 12:46 - Sep 23 by danehoop |
Apparently Grouse shooting is still OK. |
If they're are willing to risk both Covid and bird flu, I say let them go for it. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 14:40]
|  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 14:31 - Sep 23 with 2549 views | WatfordR |
| bang goes oct then on 12:05 - Sep 23 by Antti_Heinola |
me too.
It was much worse when there was nothing at all. And games recently have been pretty good I think. Plenty of goals.
Banning fans, though, is all about optics. I was at a market at the weekend and it was RAMMED. Some with masks, but many not as they were eating. All outdoors etc, but how can that be ok, but even 3000 properly spaced at a foiotball ground not be? It's because they allowed sport to continue last time and they're sensitive to criticism. As always with this shower running the country, it's completely reactive. |
Utterly ridiculous that you can’t have people sitting next to each other wearing masks at an outdoor event but it’s apparently fine to have people sat next to each other in confined indoor spaces like a tube carriage.
As for the idea of going to watch football, I’m not sure it’s going to make a huge difference to the viability of a club in the Championship whether they are watched by an audience of zero or 3,000. And I’ve said before, I can’t get enthused about attending games regularly where the atmosphere has all the fervour of an early rounds League Cup game.
I fear the writing is on the wall for many professional sports. And I’m in agreement with one or two others on here, it’s not even close to the top of the list of priorities that society is going to need to deal with over the coming years |  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 14:50 - Sep 23 with 2505 views | Cliff |
| bang goes oct then on 14:31 - Sep 23 by WatfordR |
Utterly ridiculous that you can’t have people sitting next to each other wearing masks at an outdoor event but it’s apparently fine to have people sat next to each other in confined indoor spaces like a tube carriage.
As for the idea of going to watch football, I’m not sure it’s going to make a huge difference to the viability of a club in the Championship whether they are watched by an audience of zero or 3,000. And I’ve said before, I can’t get enthused about attending games regularly where the atmosphere has all the fervour of an early rounds League Cup game.
I fear the writing is on the wall for many professional sports. And I’m in agreement with one or two others on here, it’s not even close to the top of the list of priorities that society is going to need to deal with over the coming years |
I'm sorry but it's not utterly ridiculous that you can ban groups of people congregating for one reason but allow it for another. What are the alternatives - ban everything or ban nothing?
If it was the exact same grouping of people at every event, ie your social bubble was the same for your local, your work, for family meetings, your football mates, etc, and you always travel as a group together then yes it would be daft to ban one and not another. But the fact is, many if not all of these groups are different for most of us and banning some of the activities will therefore have an effect as it will reduce the number of people we interact with. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| bang goes oct then on 15:39 - Sep 23 with 2413 views | daveB |
| bang goes oct then on 14:50 - Sep 23 by Cliff |
I'm sorry but it's not utterly ridiculous that you can ban groups of people congregating for one reason but allow it for another. What are the alternatives - ban everything or ban nothing?
If it was the exact same grouping of people at every event, ie your social bubble was the same for your local, your work, for family meetings, your football mates, etc, and you always travel as a group together then yes it would be daft to ban one and not another. But the fact is, many if not all of these groups are different for most of us and banning some of the activities will therefore have an effect as it will reduce the number of people we interact with. |
The daft bit is I can now go to the pub to watch the games indoors but can't go with the same people to watch it outdoors. Of course there are problems with going to sporting events and I'm not saying we should open it up to all but a continuation of small test events to see the effect made sense. | | | |
| bang goes oct then on 15:48 - Sep 23 with 2402 views | Esox_Lucius |
As long as games are finished and the fans out by 22:00 it will be perfectly safe to attend football matches. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| bang goes oct then on 15:55 - Sep 23 with 2386 views | Cliff |
| bang goes oct then on 15:48 - Sep 23 by Esox_Lucius |
As long as games are finished and the fans out by 22:00 it will be perfectly safe to attend football matches. |
Says who? | | | |
| bang goes oct then on 16:41 - Sep 23 with 2301 views | Hayesender |
| bang goes oct then on 15:55 - Sep 23 by Cliff |
Says who? |
Boris |  |
| |
| bang goes oct then on 17:46 - Sep 23 with 2203 views | Hunterhoop |
| bang goes oct then on 14:31 - Sep 23 by WatfordR |
Utterly ridiculous that you can’t have people sitting next to each other wearing masks at an outdoor event but it’s apparently fine to have people sat next to each other in confined indoor spaces like a tube carriage.
As for the idea of going to watch football, I’m not sure it’s going to make a huge difference to the viability of a club in the Championship whether they are watched by an audience of zero or 3,000. And I’ve said before, I can’t get enthused about attending games regularly where the atmosphere has all the fervour of an early rounds League Cup game.
I fear the writing is on the wall for many professional sports. And I’m in agreement with one or two others on here, it’s not even close to the top of the list of priorities that society is going to need to deal with over the coming years |
I think you’re wrong there, Watford. Not on the bulk of the post but the end bit.
Sports, the arts, the entertainment industry are all crucial cultural components that play a vital role in a functioning society, happy citizenship and prosperous economy. What is more important?
Health? Well, of course. But many in society willingly choose to damage their health through drink, drugs, sport, lack of exercise, bad diet, etc.
If you’re referring to the economy, i.e. people’s livelihoods, then sport, the arts and entertainment are all part of that. Technically vast swathes of the service sector, the UK’s largest sector, are kept afloat by customers who are only customers because they’re attending an event (sporting or otherwise) in person.
At the minute the Conservatives are trying to find this balance of public health/deaths/PR vs keeping the economy alive. They’ve determined that many sectors where workers must be present to complete their jobs (e.g. construction, transport, etc) must remain open and people must travel to them. They’ve even decided/realised that the service sector is critical and so bars, restaurants, cafes, etc, should remain open (and adhere to Covid guidelines).
However, they are deciding that certain sectors are not worthy of opening and the economic impact of having these closed and not operational is a price worth paying. That is certainly up for debate, surely?
I’m not sure in whatever analysis they’ve done they truly understand the link and indirect impact of the sports/arts/entertainment industry on the service sector, and the most recent restrictions could damage both significantly.
The second point concerns the risk of damaging both sectors irreversibly, certainly for a generation. Given the likely outcome will be high unemployment, credit being harder to come by, potentially greater taxation to pay for the recovery and the increased burden on the welfare state...you’re not going to have a lot of these small-medium businesses going bust restarted in the near future.
You could end up with a lost decade and some extremely challenging conditions for much of the population. If you don’t provide the populous with something that helps them “escape” this reality, makes them “happy”, and keeps the wheels of consumer spending going, you are likely to find compliance decreases and social unrest rises.
I’ve always felt the Conservatives don’t truly understand how the working man operates and thinks. They undoubtedly perceived the majority of them right on Brexit, but I think they’re making the wrong call with sport, I really do.
In darkness you need to provide some light. For many that light is sport.
Ultimately as this has gone on, I’m unconvinced you can successfully achieve a balance between killing off the virus (or beating into retreat or whatever war terminology Boris chooses to use) and keeping the economy alive and some personal freedoms available. I think they b*ggered up so much at the start, and relaxed lockdown 4 weeks too early, before we’d even had a day of zero cases, that the cat is firmly out of the back. If it’s as contagious as we’re led to believe, and we continue with the rules we have now, i think it will go through the population (although I’m far more optimistic than the govt of what the death toll will actually be).
I think it really is “full lockdown for a shortish period” or roll with full personal freedom (or at least a gradual return to personal freedom), not this half way house where some sectors survive and others don’t and the happiness and mental health of the population is severely impacted.
There was a solution here. It was an effective testing and track and trace system. If you have that you can open up the economy and country but still control the virus. Unfortunately you needed to have this in place for when you emerged from lockdown (with very few cases). Manage it well from there, like NZ, HK, Singapore, etc, and you control it. Unfortunately, Boris jumped the gun. And No. 10 (and Hancock) have buggered up the Testing, Track and Trace. There is no point testing, tracking, tracing and contacting people who have been close to a positive case unless you can do it all in a day...otherwise they have too much time to infect others and the virus spreads again.
If we’d held the first proper lockdown longer, and had testing capacity up quicker and a much better track and trace system in place BEFORE we relaxed restrictions, we wouldn’t be needing these new measures. But the government failed here. They failed us.
Now it comes down to which you value more: the economy for the next 5 years and social freedoms today or minimising deaths in the next 6 months. I’m not sure the middle ground is achievable. In trying to balance on the fence (predominantly for political reasons), I think the government may cause near to the worst of both worlds.
Here’s hoping the virus is weaker than it was in the Spring. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 19:04]
|  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 18:30 - Sep 23 with 2162 views | Antti_Heinola |
Agree Hunter. I think there's a tendency for the population at large to think 'sport? the arts?' they're all millionaires! who cares?' without really considering the thousands and thousands of jobs that those sectors supply and people rely on. They are both 'fun' of course, but that makes them no less viable as businesses and employers and the employees are no less important than the service industry or any other struggling industry. It's actually really important to find ways of keeping them going. Even having small crowds into stadiums should be reasonably safe, even if it means masks and, sadly, those with conditions choose not to risk it. I think it's safer to go to a football stadium than to be on a train, by far (although obviously you'd probably take a train to get there!).
Hopefully, although it seems doubtful, a month of the new rules might help the figures and embolden the government a bit to allow some fans in. | |
| |
| bang goes oct then on 06:25 - Sep 24 with 1978 views | BklynRanger |
Probably been mentioned but I feel very sorry for the staff at the club - spent weeks trying to sort all of this out, algorithms and planning, trying to anticipate and interpret the regs, Lee Hoos on the podcast etc.
Wasn't always handled seamlessly but few things are at the moment and you could see they were trying their best. Must be very demoralising to have it all ripped up after all that. Shit times at the minute no two ways about it. |  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 08:35 - Sep 24 with 1853 views | BlackCrowe |
| bang goes oct then on 06:25 - Sep 24 by BklynRanger |
Probably been mentioned but I feel very sorry for the staff at the club - spent weeks trying to sort all of this out, algorithms and planning, trying to anticipate and interpret the regs, Lee Hoos on the podcast etc.
Wasn't always handled seamlessly but few things are at the moment and you could see they were trying their best. Must be very demoralising to have it all ripped up after all that. Shit times at the minute no two ways about it. |
Alas i can't log on in any case. Well i can actually log on (via ridiculous trial and error navigation) and get to the right page to be told system error.
I love our club, our management, our ethos in the community but god our website is possible the most unintuitive and user unfriendly i've experienced. |  |
| |
| bang goes oct then on 09:43 - Sep 24 with 1762 views | NorthantsHoop |
In a way I think we all suspected that the chances of having fans back in the ground for this new season was pretty remote.
This damn virus is driving a coach and horses through society and the way we go about things. Football is no different in that respect. Whether we like it or not it will have to adapt at least for the short term, be that new player wage structures, funding passing down from the Premier TV money, greater access to paid streaming, with fair revenue passing to clubs etc.
On a QPR perspective I would much rather they told us for revenue streaming purposes how much streams they need to sell per game to make the same amount of having bums on seats for games. Be transparent, encourage fans to sign up, we must have more than 18,000 fans, if they all paid a tenner, then that is a start, adding in away fans and splitting gained revenue between clubs for those would help as well. [Post edited 24 Sep 2020 9:45]
|  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 10:48 - Sep 24 with 1702 views | Cliff |
The interesting thing here is how are the clubs going to respond to the news that fans aren't coming back?
At the end of last season, Leagues 1, 2 and below called off the remaining matches because it would cost too much to put them on, surely it's the same situation now.
I'm sure many Championship clubs are going to be in the same boat, i.e won't make enough money from the matches to cover losses, which not many were doing even with gate receipts, without them it might tip them over the edge.
I for one would not want to see any tax payers money going to clubs if all it went on was paying the players salaries, surely now players have got to take some responsibility for the future of the game. The stance of "I've got a water tight contract so you have to pay me no matter what" won't hold if it sends their club to the wall. [Post edited 24 Sep 2020 12:59]
| | | |
| bang goes oct then on 13:18 - Sep 24 with 1626 views | PinnerPaul |
| bang goes oct then on 17:57 - Sep 22 by VancouverHoop |
Apparently clubs at Step 3 and below are exempt. So Needham Market should be OK (as should Hitchin Town, my 'other team.' )
It's likely to finish many National League clubs though. |
Lets hope that continues - still getting plenty of games to officiate at my level. |  | | |
| bang goes oct then on 14:49 - Sep 24 with 1529 views | Cliff |
Unfortunately, whilst that all reads well on the surface what it actually boils down to is I only care about my business sector so please let me open and shut down someone else.
It's a simple fact that restrictions are needed at the moment to get this second wave under control, and at a time when restrictions are being tightened it's plain daft to open up areas like football. So unless he, or anyone else, can suggest other areas to further lockdown to offset opening up football it just smack of the NIMBY attitude. | | | |
| bang goes oct then on 15:00 - Sep 24 with 1514 views | PinnerPaul |
| bang goes oct then on 14:49 - Sep 24 by Cliff |
Unfortunately, whilst that all reads well on the surface what it actually boils down to is I only care about my business sector so please let me open and shut down someone else.
It's a simple fact that restrictions are needed at the moment to get this second wave under control, and at a time when restrictions are being tightened it's plain daft to open up areas like football. So unless he, or anyone else, can suggest other areas to further lockdown to offset opening up football it just smack of the NIMBY attitude. |
You miss the point there Cliff - 'offset opening football' - that's his point if the SAGs deem it safe, INCLUDING the risk of Covid transmission then why arbitrarily say its isn't?
Don't get your offset argument at all I'm afraid - are you saying if one restriction is lifted another should be imposed and vice versa? | | | |
| bang goes oct then on 15:12 - Sep 24 with 1492 views | Cliff |
| bang goes oct then on 15:00 - Sep 24 by PinnerPaul |
You miss the point there Cliff - 'offset opening football' - that's his point if the SAGs deem it safe, INCLUDING the risk of Covid transmission then why arbitrarily say its isn't?
Don't get your offset argument at all I'm afraid - are you saying if one restriction is lifted another should be imposed and vice versa? |
No I think you and he are missing the point.
The SAG's have said it is safe under the rules of the OLD set of regulations. they obviously don't meet the new set because the new set says they are to stay shut - full stop.
The offset argument is: The last set of restrictions were obviously inadequate to control the spread of Covid, as shown by the increasing numbers,therefore to stop this increase extra restrictions are needed. Every restriction put in place is designed to lower the transmission rate. Every restriction lifted will tend to raise the transmission rate, as seen when the almost total lockdown was relaxed a wile back. So yes, at a time when you want to lower the transmission rate you need to apply more restrictions, if you open up something like football you will have to close something else to balance it's effect. That's why earlier when schools opening was being discussed it was suggested by the government that pubs might have to shut again to offset their effect. [Post edited 24 Sep 2020 15:16]
| | | |
| bang goes oct then on 15:26 - Sep 24 with 1464 views | PinnerPaul |
| bang goes oct then on 15:12 - Sep 24 by Cliff |
No I think you and he are missing the point.
The SAG's have said it is safe under the rules of the OLD set of regulations. they obviously don't meet the new set because the new set says they are to stay shut - full stop.
The offset argument is: The last set of restrictions were obviously inadequate to control the spread of Covid, as shown by the increasing numbers,therefore to stop this increase extra restrictions are needed. Every restriction put in place is designed to lower the transmission rate. Every restriction lifted will tend to raise the transmission rate, as seen when the almost total lockdown was relaxed a wile back. So yes, at a time when you want to lower the transmission rate you need to apply more restrictions, if you open up something like football you will have to close something else to balance it's effect. That's why earlier when schools opening was being discussed it was suggested by the government that pubs might have to shut again to offset their effect. [Post edited 24 Sep 2020 15:16]
|
Not sure on the Sags argument - they surely work to the set of circumstances presented to them at each stadium at that time - they would look at local rate of transmission and take into account other restrictions in place surely?
Seems to me government has missed a trick here - by passing over responsibility to the existing safety framework, they could step back from the sport argument at least.
As for offsetting - well that clearly doesn't happen as schools AND pubs ARE still open! | | | |
| bang goes oct then on 15:44 - Sep 24 with 1430 views | Cliff |
| bang goes oct then on 15:26 - Sep 24 by PinnerPaul |
Not sure on the Sags argument - they surely work to the set of circumstances presented to them at each stadium at that time - they would look at local rate of transmission and take into account other restrictions in place surely?
Seems to me government has missed a trick here - by passing over responsibility to the existing safety framework, they could step back from the sport argument at least.
As for offsetting - well that clearly doesn't happen as schools AND pubs ARE still open! |
"Not sure on the Sags argument - they surely work to the set of circumstances presented to them at each stadium at that time"
I assume they did and at the time they come up with recommendations based on the restrictions AT THE TIME. However the restrictions now state that the grounds cannot open at all, and the SAGs have no option but to agree.
"they would look at local rate of transmission and take into account other restrictions in place surely"
I doubt they have any authority or expertise to look at anything other than what is in their remit.
I am diametrically opposed to Boris and his government in almost everything it says and does, but at least they haven't been stupid enough to allow any sector to make it's own decisions by delegating responsibility. Surely anyone can see that everyone would put their sector above eveyone elses and we'd no restrictions at all!
I think you'll find offsetting does happen just the example I gave hasn't been deemed necessary yet. They have however tightened restrictions on pubs as a first step
I really can't see why people don't get it - you open things up and allow more mixing and interaction the routes for Covid spreading also increase, you shut things down and restrict interactions Covid has less routes to spread [Post edited 24 Sep 2020 16:06]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
