- Aug 13, 2005
- 46,700
- 104,989
That's that then!
If you look at the stats for death by age group, the risk to players is tiny. They have more chance of writing themselves off driving to the ground.
Yes you can. Elecsys from Roche has a specificity greater than 99.8% and sensitivity of 100%, meaning it gives no false negative results and only one in 500 false positives.We've discussed this already but you can't know how effective the testing will be.
IMO hairdressers would have a similar rate of contact with a client, especially when you consider the general area of the client they are making contact with is the same one that expels the virus.It's a contact sport, nobody else in any other working environment has that rate and level of contact.
NHS workers are essential to save lives, people working in shops are essential for people to get food and drink ... Tell me what is essential for footballers to be playing?
It's not about the money they earn, it's about the job not being essential or safe to do at social distancing.
We've discussed this already but you can't know how effective the testing will be.
It's a contact sport, nobody else in any other working environment has that rate and level of contact.
It's just in no way comparable.
Tell me what is essential about eating a pizza from Dominos and playing the latest PS4 released game that i just got shipped to me in 1 day?
McDonalds is not essential. Aston Martin is not essential. 99% of what is sold on Amazon is not essential. Garden centres are not essential. the list of this goes on and on...
The point of this is that we are now coming out of the "essential only" stage, and truthfully we were never fully in it. We were in an "essential with some nice to haves" stage.
Football is a nice to have. We're moving into a stage where the government is considering the re-introduction of "nice to haves" and football (and sport in general) is a part of that.
[
The issue with football imo is firstly they wont be applying these measures, to do this they need testing which at the moment takes away from key workers/services etc when this government has continually missed its testing target per day, is hard to justify,
Nick u do realise that the TV money was already paid out, hense the need to complete the gamesThey really need to change the narrative and I believe coming to an agreement with broadcasters to sell the behind closed doors packages and send that money all the way down the football leagues would do that.
It would give the players the sense that they're not doing it for "nothing", I know they get paid a shit load of money but that doesn't make them immune to any of the fears me or you have. They'd be helping save many of the football league clubs that are going to be in a desperate state over the next year, some may even fold and I believe it would make them feel a lot better about playing by doing something for the broader good of the game.
IMO hairdressers would have a similar rate of contact with a client, especially when you consider the general area of the client they are making contact with is the same one that expels the virus.
Also very few other working environments will be providing rigorous testing, quarantining of staff and onsite medical professionals.
Risk is not about a single factor, but a combination of factors. IMO when you account for the combination of factors involved I don't think that football is that much different to some other working environments.
Eating food is essential, so it kinds is!
All the jobs you have mentioned can be done while keeping social distancing where as football can't.
I struggle to see how you can't see this is the main point about all this
That's that then!
This whole piece is conjecture and guess work.
By all accounts neither the government nor the powers that be in football have any intention of letting football resume without applying any measures. I've not seen a single sound report from anyone suggesting this as a reality.
The testing bit is a massive guess. How do you know this will taking testing away from key workers? China is about to roll out testing to 11 million people within 10 days. I have no idea if this is feasible or not in the UK, but neither do you.
Would i be opposed to starting football back up if it means taking tests away from key workers - yes of course, but we don't know that at this stage.
Yeh i agree there are a LOT of factors that need to be looked at. But for me the ability to provide safeguards around the contraction of C-19 in football are sufficient enough, in theory, to make it at least as risk adverse as all the other workers who will be back at work around this time.A football match 11v11 behind closed doors, yes you are right is not much different especially with all players being tested, BUT as I have said before its too simplistic to look at it like that as there are so many other factors involved (which I mentioned) in determining if matches should be played.
Tell me what is essential about eating a pizza from Dominos and playing the latest PS4 released game that i just got shipped to me in 1 day?
McDonalds is not essential. Aston Martin is not essential. 99% of what is sold on Amazon is not essential. Garden centres are not essential. the list of this goes on and on...
The point of this is that we are now coming out of the "essential only" stage, and truthfully we were never fully in it. We were in an "essential with some nice to haves" stage.
Football is a nice to have. We're moving into a stage where the government is considering the re-introduction of "nice to haves" and football (and sport in general) is a part of that.
We're getting into the realms of the politics thread here when we talk about the governments inability to test people at scale. But you're looking at current standards versus standards in 4 weeks time. Like i said it might not be possible, in which case football shouldn't go ahead, but it taking tests away from key workers isn't an issue then i don't see the problem with testing footballers.The Government said that they will have capacity for 100,000 tests per day, that was there target, they have missed it 8 days in a row, so It would be impossible for them to test 11million in 10 days and nor do I think they are competent enough to deliver anywhere near the figure China is about to roll out.
When you see the current care home crisis and care workers coming out daily saying they need more PPE / testing I think its safe to assume at this stage it is taking away from key workers.
Eating McDonald's is not kind of essential. In fact it's detrimental to your health in the majority of cases and leads to obesity which increases your chances of having a more severe case of C-19.
Where is the evidence for your claims that A) all the jobs can be done while keeping social distancing and B) that football can't do this?
For point A) I'll start with takeaway food. If like me you have several local takeaways near you i want you to think about the size of their kitchen and number of staff they need to have to operate it. It might the local chippy or even, in many cases, somewhere like McDonalds or a popular coffee chain. Social distancing = a radius of 2m around every person all the time. Are you telling me that you honestly believe that these businesses are managing to adhere to this distance? Of course not.
Add into this that none of the staff are being tested. None of the public that are coming in and buying food are being tested. There are no quarantine procedures around the staff or public and in the event that a worker does catch the virus they do not have on hand medical staff to ensure it is caught early and to get on site medical assistance.
I'm not struggling to get the main point. You are looking at this whole thing far too simplistically and naively if you believe your narrative above.
We're getting into the realms of the politics thread here when we talk about the governments inability to test people at scale. But you're looking at current standards versus standards in 4 weeks time. Like i said it might not be possible, in which case football shouldn't go ahead, but it taking tests away from key workers isn't an issue then i don't see the problem with testing footballers.
As your asking others for evidence, can you provide some for the bit above?