My biggest fear is playing the PL , voiding the FA Cup , making the Europa League unplayable due to travel , Utd not making CL next year and Liverpool winning the league.
It’s a possibility unfortunately.
It’s a possibility unfortunately.
Could they void the PL due to the Coronavirus? | No | Resuming June 17th
- Thread starter Tarrou
- Start date
And again @Brightonian explained why they actually carry for risk.
The fact 3 players in 1 german club have caught it a few days after training together says otherwise
Well my wife works in a shop that has been opened throughout all this and would beg to differ with everything he said as i told him at the time.
Social distancing and other things can be implemented safely in a shop.
Hers has 10 staff and all have worked throughout this whole ordeal
Meant to quote this
He did make a post but it wasn't that detailed and didn't say anything particularly interesting that we don't already know. Not sure why you're using it as some kind of benchmark piece on the subject. I disagreed with the majority of what was written.
So how exactly did so many football players catch it earlier than? Disproportionately high numbers in Italy for example.
Btw, there were also studies in the beginning of the pandemic which were saying that mass gatherings outside like football games were absolutely safe. That's how Liverpool vs Atletico went on, and we've seen where it's gone to.
Italian epidemiologists are fairly certain that Atalanta - Valencia game helped spread it like bushfire, but you seem to be glad to dismiss all those findings because they don't suit your agenda.
Biggest fear?
Id say the biggest fear, snd obviously a sporting context only, would be no football for a couple of years. It's already inevitable there won't be going to games until 2021.
Liverpool will be declared champs this season, so i'd probably get used to that.
The only way any of this works is, if it can be guaranteed that there's almost a zero percent chance that someone infected enters the pitch and the surrounding area. If that can be achieved, with extensive testing and some social distancing measures in place, that would effectively eliminate the need to quarantine the entire team if one player is infected. Is this possible? Probably. Is it viable? I don't know, probably not at this point in time.
Either way it doesn't matter to my argument, because I didn't compare COVID-19 to injuries, I didn't at all express an opinion about the viability of the league returning or about any moral implications of keeping the players safe/unsafe. I specifically answered the question "Should they play without them - is that fair?", with the preface, that in isolation, playing with less than a full squad of players is completely fair and quite usual, but this doesn't necessarily mean that it should happen in this particular situation.
I am disputing this one particular point in his argument, that is completely nonsensical. Players missing games is not unfair. The idea is, if you're completely convinced that only your way of thinking is correct and there's no debate to had, you should be able to prove that with solid, bulletproof, thought-out arguments and not pile on weaker ones with the hope that it makes your stance look stronger.
This thread is quite interesting. It's now turned to those that are crazy desperate to get football going again belittling and being condescending to anyone who disagrees or believes otherwise. It's even got to the point where the view is that if you don't think football should resume at the moment you're a snowflake and have some kind of mental insecurity.
I'm quite sure it's the reverse tbh and those with all of the bravado and forceful opinion on others are those with the insecurities and they are simply trying to project.
I'm quite sure it's the reverse tbh and those with all of the bravado and forceful opinion on others are those with the insecurities and they are simply trying to project.
Feeling a little out of the loop on all this, but maybe everyone's a bit in the dark.
What's likely to happen with the transfer window if leagues are taking different approaches to finishing/ending on different dates? How are contracts being honoured if the season is continued beyond it's normal end-point? Will loans be concluded as agreed?
Surely with some major European leagues clearly prioritising being able to start from the 20/21 season when they return, that's got to incentivise most leagues to follow suit. Otherwise it could be absolute chaos.
What I want to see happen changes pretty much on a daily basis. I am desperate to have football back asap. But it would be utterly farcical if teams are constantly having players test positive and drop out of squads/having whole chunks of a squad missing for weeks.
What's likely to happen with the transfer window if leagues are taking different approaches to finishing/ending on different dates? How are contracts being honoured if the season is continued beyond it's normal end-point? Will loans be concluded as agreed?
Surely with some major European leagues clearly prioritising being able to start from the 20/21 season when they return, that's got to incentivise most leagues to follow suit. Otherwise it could be absolute chaos.
What I want to see happen changes pretty much on a daily basis. I am desperate to have football back asap. But it would be utterly farcical if teams are constantly having players test positive and drop out of squads/having whole chunks of a squad missing for weeks.
That little rant would be all well and good if I was suggesting bringing crowds back.
But I'm not, but then I'm guessing that doesn't suit your agenda.
Why would he not be allowed to enter pitch and surrounding area. If you don't quarantine entire team that went into close contact with that player (and it is the golden standard in all industries, not just football), why would it matter whether he steps on pitch or not? Assuming he doesn't feel sick of course.
And from what I can recall he had a counter argument to pretty much everything that was thrown on him, to which point he was re hit by stuff he already countered.
Are you wilfully playing silly buggers?
It's pretty obvious why players getting the virus is much more of a problem than normal injuries.
Not really. Much, if not all, of what he said was subjective and based on his own opinion. As is much of this thread.
To answer one bit..yes a McDonalds would obviously have to be closed and deep cleaned very thoroughly if someone working there was found positive.
You're 100% right!
And on the flip side, if you want football back your branded as some sort of re born Fred West (including hilariously by some one who's main activity on here is discussing the potential Jadon Sancho to United transfer).
No, actually it has nothing to do with the crowds, nobody in their right frame of mind would suggest anything about the crowds. My point was, anyone can find "expert" opinions that fit their agenda for pretty much anything. Less than two months ago, certain experts were saying that it's safe to play in front of the crowds, while pretty much everything was pointing otherwise.
Same way, this Aarhus study could be proven to be tottaly of the mark. Which I certainly hope we don't have to learn the hard way. If three Koln players have been contaminated just by training, how can we guarantee safety to others?
Do you really think people actually want this miserable half a life status to continue?
What an odd suggestion.
There's exchange going back and forth but I don't think the "hang on and wait" or "cancel" brigade have started calling others mentally ill.
Just seems pretty crass to me at a time when mental health issues are quite prevalent in society.
As testing becomes easier and more prevalent then finding infected people early and isolating their main contacts will very much be the way forward in reducing the numbers infected. Some believe Covid can be eliminated with this strategy, but even if not it would greatly reduce the number of deaths occurring.
So the answer to your question is that a branch of McDonalds likely would have to close for a fortnight if the staff were infected, yes.
I don't know if you're deliberately wumming or just not thinking about what you post, either way you might be better slowing it down a bit.
You're supposed to test players and staff if their infected every time before they congregate in an area where the conditions for the spread of the virus are good. So if you find a carrier you pull them out of the process, which should significantly reduce the chance of others getting infected.
It's the golden standard because no one is tested at the rate that anybody involved in restarting the league should be. Of course, that's not something that's necessarily sensible to do for a while yet.
I'm talking specifically about fairness here. Would it be fair if Cologne play with two players on the sidelines? Yes, it would be fair, that's not unusual.
Here is TheReligion a few pages ago
Awww why is everyone else so condesending
I find it most interesting to read how some people genuinely believe football will be back soon.
As despite the constant propoganda from the FA it all looks utterly impossible for the forseeable.
Here is TheReligion a few pages ago
Awww why is everyone else so condesending
Top referencing!
I'm assuming the "agenda" some people are meant to have regarding wanting the season finished now is they don't want Liverpool to win the league? Despite the fact they may still be given it anyway, finishing now actually hurts United and no one wants the world to remain like this, I'm not really sure this is a fantastic agenda to have really? Anyone?
Whilst on the other side of the fence those pushing like crazy have a clear, selfish agenda for wanting it to carry on.
Hmmmm.
Whilst on the other side of the fence those pushing like crazy have a clear, selfish agenda for wanting it to carry on.
Hmmmm.
Here is TheReligion a few pages ago
Awww why is everyone else so condesending
I'm not sure you understand what condescending means...
(And that's not condescending.. )
let’s expand on fairness then. Is it fair that Liverpool have played City at Anfield but under these new proposals will play the next game at a neutral venue?
I think this is it really isn't it. Clear head banging against the wall moment. I think most people wonder why the big panic and rush over it when it's essentially a game. There's much more going on at the moment throughout the world which is far more important than trying to shoehorn 9 games of football in.
Meh it would be if it made any sense
The reality is if we keep closing things down on one case long term we'd effectively be in a lockdown again which will kill the economy and then deny funding to the NHS and therefore contradict the entire reason we took this caution in the first place. So to play hypothetics we shut Maccies down plus every single person the man in question comes into contact with, if those include employees of essential supermarkets and banks then what? Shut them down aswell?
At some point society has to find a way to co exist with this virus because if it doesn't then the virus will become the least of our problems.
But isn't it excess risk, knowing that the virus has a five to 14 day incubation period, with some pointing that it could be even longer? So, a player is tested today and is negative/false negative/whatever but is actually a carrier, or becomes one in between the moment of testing and receiveing results. Trains with teammates, spreads the thing around, tests positive tommorow. He is out, but his teammates, who are not quarantineed and separated out, become carriers. It's enough to have one of them catch it, two of them is disaster already.
Still it's not impossible to continue, but what if someone has complications, and ends up in coma like that Montpellier player a week or so ago? I mean, when is the breaking point, when someone dies?
I don't want to expand it, I'm not arguing the return of the league is fair, I'm arguing that performing without your unavailable players is.
I believe the first rule of declaring "agenda" on someone on line is simply that they don't agree with you.
"Trolling" can also be declared for the same reason, but i think that's more of a facebook type strategy.
Read a bit slower. I said 'isolating their main contacts', not every contact. I don't know if you're just over-excited or what but you're making this sort of mistake in nearly every post. Slow down.
Last edited:
Plus, is there any source to support that Reddit post? As far as I can see, it's just another random post made by a random guy, with no scientific evidence and the so-called study from Aarhus University is non-existent. As I've said pages ago, many Western countries and media are trying to play the threat of COVID-19 down deliberately and the last thing we want is to spread and form public opinons based on these fake news.