Fans back into stadiums

[0Neils40yarder]

1 hour ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

And there was a major outbreak associated with this??

That's akin to saying, 'I drink drive, but I've never knocked anyone down, so nae harm done'

[Spiderpig]

2 hours ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

Do we have to worry about people who go shopping on a Saturday and what they do before and after the shops?

The  demographic of the punters is what it is, very varied....need to concentrate on ways to get them back in , not why they shouldn’t be back

licensed premises are responsible for very few transmission of cases,it should be up to people whether they go to them , some will , some won’t . Once they are in the ground , I don’t see the risk.

So by your  theory, some random person sitting near you at fir park, coughing etc spreading the virus to everyone nearby is no risk, 

Any large gathering of people wherever it is , pubs, football stadiums, walking down the road etc is ideal conditions for spreading the virus.

So until this virus is under control there will be no fans anywhere near stadiums, nothing to do with politics but all to do with public health, simples.

[weeyin]

The Northern Ireland guidelines say:

Gatherings indoors or outdoors, not in a private dwelling, of up to 15 people are permitted.

The limit for gathering indoors and outdoors does not apply where that gathering has a recognised person responsible for organising or operating the gathering and it is organised or operated for a particular nature,, including those organised:

for cultural, entertainment, recreational, outdoor sports, social, community, educational, work, legal, religious or political purposes 

Make of that what you will. 

 

 

[Great Balls of Shire]

44 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

That's akin to saying, 'I drink drive, but I've never knocked anyone down, so nae harm done'

I’d say it’s more of a quick risk assessment, guys standing next to each other for a 30 second photograph, I’m here to be proven wrong but I don’t anticipate any transmission there...even if one of them was positive. 

[0Neils40yarder]

3 minutes ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

I’d say it’s more of a quick risk assessment, guys standing next to each other for a 30 second photograph, I’m here to be proven wrong but I don’t anticipate any transmission there...even if one of them was positive. 

It's only a 5minute drive, it's late at night...it'll be fine 

[Great Balls of Shire]

7 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

So by your  theory, some random person sitting near you at fir park, coughing etc spreading the virus to everyone nearby is no risk, 

Any large gathering of people wherever it is , pubs, football stadiums, walking down the road etc is ideal conditions for spreading the virus.

So until this virus is under control there will be no fans anywhere near stadiums, nothing to do with politics but all to do with public health, simples.

Pubs would be a far higher risk than an outside football park but if the correct controls are in place

...I would be prepared to take my chances in an outside environment, it does not live for long outdoors and is dissipated into the atmosphere...it’s for other people to make their own choices

[Great Balls of Shire]

3 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

It's only a 5minute drive, it's late at night...it'll be fine 

Never knowingly drunk drove so can’t comment on that ,  so conflating the two scenarios doesn’t make sense

[steelboy]

14 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

So by your  theory, some random person sitting near you at fir park, coughing etc spreading the virus to everyone nearby is no risk, 

Any large gathering of people wherever it is , pubs, football stadiums, walking down the road etc is ideal conditions for spreading the virus.

So until this virus is under control there will be no fans anywhere near stadiums, nothing to do with politics but all to do with public health, simples.

You better give your 'simples' advice to Angela Merkel because Germany seem to be working from different assumptions.

[Great Balls of Shire]

19 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

So by your  theory, some random person sitting near you at fir park, coughing etc spreading the virus to everyone nearby is no risk, 

Any large gathering of people wherever it is , pubs, football stadiums, walking down the road etc is ideal conditions for spreading the virus.

So until this virus is under control there will be no fans anywhere near stadiums, nothing to do with politics but all to do with public health, simples.

If you’re talking about waiting on a vaccine , it could be years away , that’s probably the only way to control it. People are only going to live like this for so long...If you want to wait years to get punters back then the game is finished

[0Neils40yarder]

17 minutes ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

Never knowingly drunk drove so can’t comment on that ,  so conflating the two scenarios doesn’t make sense

It makes perfect sense...both scenarios are suggesting unnecessary risk

[Great Balls of Shire]

23 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

It makes perfect sense...both scenarios are suggesting unnecessary risk

There nothing like each other,  there’s definitely no point drink driving ,it’s been shown the devastation it can cause

 

 but if you want to talk about risk and benefits....a minimal risk of transmission in outdoor arenas against the survival of your club 

 

until punters are given the chance we don’t fully know what the risk are but science says much greater risk inside , outside minimal risk but probably until some of the championship clubs go under , we can all keep hiding under the duvet 

[0Neils40yarder]

2 minutes ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

There nothing like each other,  there’s definitely no point drink driving ,it’s been shown the devastation it can cause

 

 but if you want to talk about risk and benefits....a minimal risk of transmission in outdoor arenas against the survival of your club 

 

until punters are given the chance we don’t fully know what the risk are but science says much greater risk inside , outside minimal risk but probably until some of the championship clubs go under , we can all keep hiding under the duvet 

We arent talking about the survival of the club...we are talking about the idiocy of our office bearers standing for a photo opportunity, flouting the covid guidelines.

[Great Balls of Shire]

13 hours ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

We arent talking about the survival of the club...we are talking about the idiocy of our office bearers standing for a photo opportunity, flouting the covid guidelines.

Morning , Fair dues, I was back on my hobby horse again

“idiocy “ is ott , they probably got put in a position and went with the flow.

its nothing like drink driving tho, one is illegal...and as you say the other is guidelines , not for people to nick about with measuring tapes and stop watches. 

Honestly think , some dudes standing for a snap for a few seconds is minimal risk 

Are slow dances at discos still a thing? That’s going to be a big miss....I won’t start a thread for this ...lol

[milo]

The authorities are going to have to come up with a creative solution to get even small numbers of socially distanced fans back into the stadiums before some clubs are forced to shut their gates, possibly forever, and see institutions of over a hundred years and providers of countless jobs and the eco system they support lost forever. 
 

I don’t see why they couldn’t have had small numbers in sitting apart, socially distanced by now, especially when it’s outside when so many indoor facilities and employers have been for months.

The Scottish government have handled the whole thing appallingly.

As an aside, don’t know about anybody else, but I’ve lost all enthusiasm for football until fans can get back in. I can still get annoyed at our performances and results right enough!

[ropy]

We should take the same approach to crowds and alcohol.  Start with League 2 and build up from there.  Stop and nudge back a little when someone wastes it for everyone else.

[Spiderpig]

59 minutes ago, milo said:

 

I don’t see why they couldn’t have had small numbers in sitting apart, socially distanced by now, especially when it’s outside when so many indoor facilities and employers have been for months.

Because certain clubs won't be happy at small numbers, the ugly sisters will start shouting and complaining to anybody who will listen about how they need the stadiums full etc.

Also the facilities the majority of bottom championship,  league 1 and 2 clubs have dont make social distancing and all the other requirements an easy or cheap option.

For me until the virus is under control the only solution is some sort of financial help for affected clubs that need it, as I don't think we will see any fans at games this season.

The SFA, SPFL , Scottish and/ or UK Government need to step up and come up with a solution.

[Ped_MFC]

1 hour ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

idiocy “ is ott , they probably got put in a position and went with the flow.

I see what you did there  

[Lobey_Dosser]

Soundbites from the likes of Lennon and the Aberdeen owner aside, I don’t get the impression top flight clubs in Scotland aren’t genuinely pushing for fans to return. Our own club has been relatively quiet. 

Acknowledging that capacity could never be above 20-25% until the virus is fully under control, there’s little to be gained from the bigger clubs pushing this. Yes, 2,500 in Fir Park or 10,000 in Ibrox would be good for the welfare of the fans that got to see their team but it’s not great financially. Maybe if the clubs sit tight and toe the line, the UK and Scottish Government may be more open to providing financial support. 

[weeyin]

Unfortunately, for as long as I can remember, governments of all persuasions (north and south of the border) have at best been dismissive of, and at worst actively hated, football.

Of course football hasn't helped itself. This is especially the case in England where billions of pounds are generated every year and instead of helping the lower league clubs, it goes straight into owners' and players' pockets. So it's easy to see why there is reluctance to bail out a business with that much cash available.

The financial situation is different in Scotland, but the attitude is pretty similar. I'd be hard pushed to identify many high ranking Scottish politicians who are active football fans.

[Kmcalpin]

7 hours ago, milo said:

I don’t see why they couldn’t have had small numbers in sitting apart, socially distanced by now, especially when it’s outside when so many indoor facilities and employers have been for months.

Agree 100%. Surely it would be safer for folk to sit 2 metres apart in a mostly empty stadium with face coverings  on than 1 metre apart in a crowded pub with no face coverings.  Pinch points like turnstiles or food kiosks or toilets could be managed just as well as they are in supermarkets, pubs, cafes and the like. How many non football employers have been fined for non compliance of their employees? Are firms being fined because their employees failed to quarantine after arriving home from abroad or failing to observe social distancing rules in pubs?

No, these decisions are being taken not only on the basis of public health but also on the economy. Pubs and the like are more importnat to the economy than football clubs.

Football is being singled out. Very inconsistent approach.

[weeyin]

Despite what you see reported in the media, the problems in the US vary significantly from state to state - as the Covid regulations are implemented locally. It's Republican run states that have the worst issues, but that's a different topic.

My state locked down pretty quickly and has been following the science as much as possible, adapting when new information was available. They recognised early on that indoors was more dangerous than outdoors and even from day 1 of lockdown, outdoor activities were restricted in numbers rather than shutdown. Conversely, pubs and nightclubs were closed and remain closed - restaurants that serve alcohol were allowed to open their outdoor dining first, and later  their indoor facilities with restrictions.

As a result, after initial caution, they have been allowing crowds of 25% into sporting events (with social distancing and mask requirements) and starting next month that will be increased to 50%. The bars and nightclubs remain closed as the combination of tight indoor spaces with drunk punters is still regarded as the highest risk.

Meanwhile, the infection rate peaked (as the original models predicted) in mid-April and declined to the low, flat level it has been at for the past couple of months.

So it's definitely possible to safely manage crowds at outdoor venues if the will is there. It seems the UK, however, was more focused on pubs and offices and is now paying the price with the recent infection spikes.

[Brazilian]

7 hours ago, milo said:

The authorities are going to have to come up with a creative solution to get even small numbers of socially distanced fans back into the stadiums before some clubs are forced to shut their gates, possibly forever, and see institutions of over a hundred years and providers of countless jobs and the eco system they support lost forever ...

 

As an aside, don’t know about anybody else, but I’ve lost all enthusiasm for football until fans can get back in. I can still get annoyed at our performances and results right enough!

not sure what you mean by authorities, but your dig at government would indicate you include them, I’d argue it’s the football businesses, and the associations that have to be coming up with the solution,  there’s no doubt a few hundred in lower league and junior grounds could be accommodated, that might help save some operations, but it’s football that needs to plan/ act not the government, who can only then review proposals,

totally agree that enthusiasm is dwindling, 

15 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Football is being singled out. Very inconsistent approach.

No it isn’t,  Is it?
from your (and most football fans perspective it might seem like it)  but it’s simply not the case.

What other spectator sports are operating events with crowds?

rugby?

horse racing?

motor racing? 

pro golf?

athletics ? , swimming?  Cycling? Marathons? Pro-Darts?

moving away from sport what other events with crowds are operating?

Concerts?   Wedding?  Funeral?  Gala days?  Religious gatherings?  Clubbing? Festivals?

im not aware of any quantity of event types with crowds  that could suggest that football is being singled out.  I’ve see attempts at comedy gigs with around 20 people or ‘drive in’ events that look shite

I believe there is opportunity, for 2-300 , increasing to maybe 500, and maybe more, IF transmission rates drop again , and IF clubs , leagues, associations , each as groups and individual businesses put together detailed risk assessment and mitigation plans and detailed proposals of operating practices, but from what I can see , football isn’t doing any of that, seems quite happy to hide behind blame being pointed at government guidance, 

and for the top clubs , hundreds of fans , just doesn’t seem to interest them .

shame as they really need to be putting long term plans together to deal with this pandemic, everything so far was panic firefighting 

 

[dennyc]

1 hour ago, Kmcalpin said:

Agree 100%. Surely it would be safer for folk to sit 2 metres apart in a mostly empty stadium with face coverings  on than 1 metre apart in a crowded pub with no face coverings.  Pinch points like turnstiles or food kiosks or toilets could be managed just as well as they are in supermarkets, pubs, cafes and the like. How many non football employers have been fined for non compliance of their employees? Are firms being fined because their employees failed to quarantine after arriving home from abroad or failing to observe social distancing rules in pubs?

No, these decisions are being taken not only on the basis of public health but also on the economy. Pubs and the like are more importnat to the economy than football clubs.

Football is being singled out. Very inconsistent approach.

At what cost to the Club? Staff. Police. Stewarding plus the expense of setting up and managing specialised seating and access arrangements would all have to be funded. I don't see Government helping with that cost. With no additional income as any fan quota would likely be insufficient to cover Season Ticket holders, never mind cash paying punters. 

And games would still require to be streamed for those ST Holders unable/not chosen to attend. At least that generates some offsetting income from away fans and non ST Holders.

Pubs, restaurants, supermarkets, Gyms, Cinemas and the like receive cash from everybody who visits.  In truth that is why they are open. Not out of public duty or for mental health reasons. Motherwell would receive no new income and it would drain vital cash resources. I do think there are mental health and social reasons why it would help to have fans back right now, but in a Commercial world it would not surprise me if Motherwell were accepting of the current arrangements for practical reasons. It might not be all about Government rulings, targeted or otherwise.

So, although I honestly believe everybody would like to open up football grounds I really I don't think it is about blaming Football Authorities, Individual Clubs, Central Government, Local Politicians or the remote possibility of fans ignoring guidelines. It  may be more about being financially prudent, even if given leeway.

A brief, one or two game trial, before a fuller opening  could be affordable for some clubs. But only on a short term basis and not for fifteen or twenty games in a row. Just guessing like everybody else, but I suspect both Aberdeen and Ross County conducted their trials in the hope of greater numbers of cash paying fans being allowed access in the very near future. Perhaps even away fans.  But the increase in infections has put paid to that.

With lower league Clubs the Season Ticket numbers might not be so great so possibly they might get some financial benefit from a few cash paying spectators. . But it might be minimal and might not be sustainable longer term for them either. I am sure the Highland League were quoted recently as being on the verge of cancelling their abbreviated season which is due to start in October? if greater fan access cannot take place.

 

 

 

[Kmcalpin]

1 minute ago, dennyc said:

At what cost to the Club? Staff. Police. Stewarding plus the expense of setting up and managing specialised seating and access arrangements would all have to be funded. I don't see Government helping with that cost. With no additional income as any fan quota would likely be insufficient to cover Season Ticket holders, never mind cash paying punters.

Firstly, perhaps Brazilian may have a point that outdoor spectator sports in general are being unfairly affected although football has been the largest victim, due to the numbers of spectators and fans involved .

The issue of financial feasibility is perfectly valid but quite separate. I don't know how financially advantageous/disadvantageous letting a small number of fans into grounds would be, but I doubt if it would be that great. If say 500 fans were allowed back into Fir Park in 1 or 2 stands I doubt the costs would be horrendous. But, if money was a factor, it would even be nice for clubs to given the chance to admit a small of spectators but then decline for the reasons you cite.

[ropy]

Football is not being picked on, if anything it has been prioritised.

The issues being debated for the return of fans has nothing to do with them sitting 2m apart in a stadium, it is travel to and from, mingling outside, crowding out pubs, and moving in/out and around the stadium.  These issues will be different for every stadium and every fan base.