Many of your points are actually countered in #9922 and #9943.
There are plenty of precautions you can adopt working as a supermarket staff, a barber, or a McDonald's staff, but not as a football player. You can wear a surgical mask in a supermarket, but you can't wear one during a match; you can stay distant from others in a supermarket, but you can't ask players to stay away when playing; you can manage the customer flow in a supermarket, but you can't avoid crowding in corners; you can avoid conversation in a supermarket, but you can't avoid contacts in football.
"You cannot spread a virus you don't have", how can you be so sure? The sensitivity of testing has always been questioned since the outbreak, even the most sensitive PCR method has an unsatisfactory false negative rate. It is also worth to note that the virus has a latent period of 14 days. I'm a healthcare professional, so I wonder what the highly advanced, expensive and fast result producing accurate testing kit is? Enlighten me and hopefully we may become Nobel Prize contenders. Otherwise we are just making bold decisions based on some unreliable results.
Testing, testing and testing, the one and only point you keep repeating is that the Premier League is rich and it can afford testing. Again and again, I have emphasized that testing is a diagnostic tool, not a precaution. Testing should never be treated as an indicator of "safe to proceed", rapid tests in particular. It's actually dangerous for a carrier who is tested negative to think he's fine and spread the virus everywhere. You can do scans to diagnose a cancer, but doing scans every day does not lower your risk of getting cancer, no matter how good the scan is. Simple as that.