crowd for israel game

[ProudScot]

I think everyone needs to accept that there won’t be any games for us till after summer and that’s best case scenario.

Unprecedented times.

Everyone stay safe. 

[aaid]

37 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Surely an important aspect of dealing with a pandemic is to continue as much as possible without disrupting normal day to day activity. Enjoyment of sport is a huge example of this.

I don't see how misfortunes to one team more than another should lead to the event being cancelled, it will still be a contest.. It will still give many of us more to do than watch sky news 24/7.

My daughter is a PE teacher and has not been told to stop teaching because of the risks, so the physical contact aspect looks like baloney to me

There is more than enough money in football to minimise the risks to an acceptable level even if it does lead to games not being as competitive as they might be the benefits for society are far more important.

Slightly of topic but with the likes of tennis and golf also getting postponed it it makes the whole of top level sport look 100% money orientated. We really should all pop ourselves if these sports cant be played with out paying customers.

Society will have to make a lot of sacrifices over the next few months. Looks like our overpaid sportsmen are exempt.

Disclaimer- I couldn't care less who wins or loses gets promoted or relegated

How many people have tested positive at your daughters school?

[Barney Rubble]

1 hour ago, aaid said:

I saw someone make a good point elsewhere.

The further the gap before any resumption the less it becomes a case of finishing off the existing season and the more it starts to look like its a new mini season but where the starting points are based on where we are now rather than everyone starting from zero.

Teams that are currently on a run of good form and challenging may struggle to recover that form after an extended break, similarly teams in poor form may come out all guns blazing.   Teams who have injuries now will have an advantage as players recover during the lay-off.    That's without starting to consider implications of players who are out of contract in the summer, those that have already signed pre-contracts.

This isn't the winter break of a couple of weeks, its more likely going to be 3-4 months at the minimum.

It's certainly a consideration, but honestly restarting the season from current status may well be the least bad option in the circumstances.

Yes, there will be issues with contract expiry (I honestly do not think we'll restart before June/July).

Voiding the season? Clubs with vested interests will - quite rightly - not vote in favour.

The priority - once we are able to talk about football as being important again - is to finish what was started and bring it to a natural conclusion.

And take everything else from there.

But that's just my opinion.

[Texas Pete]

5 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Thing is there are many dangerous occupations like fishermen and agriculture workers who have to work in dangerous conditions but footballers who get paid a fortune are getting to self isolate when the rest of the population are out working through this whole pandemic. There's lots of illnesses and cancers that are untreatable but everyone gets on with life as best as we can. 50 or so ppl meeting in a stadium twice a week to play out the remainder of the season is no big deal and I can't imagine it would have had a huge impact on the amount of ppl getting infected. As I said they could of had a rule where if a certain number of players are infected from one teams squad then the game gets postponed for a couple of weeks. The longer they leave it then the more chance they won't be able to start up again for several months as the number of infected will be massive in three months time. 

What difference does it make if the season gets finished or not? 

The football authorities have decided to shut down. It isn’t the players or the clubs that have decided this. 

I’m sure lots of businesses would love to close until this blows over but they won’t be able to afford it. 

Playing games behind closed doors will cost football clubs more than not playing at all, with the exception of TV games. We are in danger of losing some of our clubs because of this and forcing them to play games behind closed doors could make matters worse. 

[ceudmilefailte]

6 minutes ago, aaid said:

How many people have tested positive at your daughters school?

As far as I am aware there aren't many people bothered about the scores in the kick abouts she supervises

The point is that you have to balance the risks with the benefits. And the benefits for society outweigh the risks to me. 

I take it you have completed your panic buying and feel the time is right for total lock down? 

[mccaughey85]

3 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

What difference does it make if the season gets finished or not? 

The football authorities have decided to shut down. It isn’t the players or the clubs that have decided this. 

I’m sure lots of businesses would love to close until this blows over but they won’t be able to afford it. 

Playing games behind closed doors will cost football clubs more than not playing at all, with the exception of TV games. We are in danger of losing some of our clubs because of this and forcing them to play games behind closed doors could make matters worse. 

There would no disputes over who gets European football or who gets relegated or who the champions of each league is. I don't see how playing games behind closed doors would cost much. The medical staff and refs etc would be a small cost. 

At the end of the day there will need to be some kind of solution for clubs that are going to struggle financially but playing behind closed doors is not going to affect that massively imo. 

[ceudmilefailte]

6 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

 

I’m sure lots of businesses would love to close until this blows over but they won’t be able to afford it. 

 

So football should simply because it can afford to? 

Lots of businesses will close and never open again but ones that provide a service at next to no risk should shut up shop? 

 

[aaid]

25 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

It's certainly a consideration, but honestly restarting the season from current status may well be the least bad option in the circumstances.

Yes, there will be issues with contract expiry (I honestly do not think we'll restart before June/July).

Voiding the season? Clubs with vested interests will - quite rightly - not vote in favour.

The priority - once we are able to talk about football as being important again - is to finish what was started and bring it to a natural conclusion.

And take everything else from there.

But that's just my opinion.

There would be people with vested interests complaining whatever way though.   Teams in relegation positions would quite like the season voided now completely, teams outside relegation would be happy to have it voided rather than extended.  Teams in the play off positions would kick off if the season was voided, teams outside the playoff position would kick off if the took league placing as it currently is.

I think that logisitics will mean that restarting the season won't be an option as it will knock on to not just next season but also the rescheduled Euro championships and probably WC qualifiers.

What the authorities do as regards season 2019/20 and promotion, relegation, European places, etc is anyone's guess 

[Texas Pete]

1 hour ago, mccaughey85 said:

There would no disputes over who gets European football or who gets relegated or who the champions of each league is. I don't see how playing games behind closed doors would cost much. The medical staff and refs etc would be a small cost. 

At the end of the day there will need to be some kind of solution for clubs that are going to struggle financially but playing behind closed doors is not going to affect that massively imo. 

Well the disputing clubs will just need to suck it up. 

[Texas Pete]

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

So football should simply because it can afford to? 

Lots of businesses will close and never open again but ones that provide a service at next to no risk should shut up shop? 

 

What service do football clubs provide when there are no fans?

[ceudmilefailte]

6 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

What service do football clubs provide when there are no fans?

Sport provides entertainment and distraction, I would say we need both more than ever just now.

 

Edited March 15, 2020 by ceudmilefailte

[Texas Pete]

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Sport provides entertainment and distraction, I would say we need both more than ever just now.

 

Nobody would see the matches to be entertained though would they? Except for the small percentage of televised games of course. 

This virus is going to go through the population like a dose of salts once it hits its peak. Not being able to watch sport on the telly is going to be the least of our worries. 

[Texas Pete]

2 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

There would no disputes over who gets European football or who gets relegated or who the champions of each league is. I don't see how playing games behind closed doors would cost much. The medical staff and refs etc would be a small cost. 

At the end of the day there will need to be some kind of solution for clubs that are going to struggle financially but playing behind closed doors is not going to affect that massively imo. 

The team bus costs money. Running/renting training grounds costs money. Providing food and refreshments for players costs money. How are teams like Albion Rovers and Clyde going to meet these costs without any gate money?

[dohadeer]

The whole country is going to be in lockdown in a week or so. The fact that football took the decision to get there a bit earlier is really irrelevant. 

I think that some people in this thread are misunderstanding how quickly entire squads of players would have been ruled out. The whole thing would have been a farce. No way they could have continued playing, I can’t believe that there are people on here who don’t accept that. Cancelling it all was the only sensible/viable/possible decision.

[mccaughey85]

3 minutes ago, dohadeer said:

The whole country is going to be in lockdown in a week or so. The fact that football took the decision to get there a bit earlier is really irrelevant. 

I think that some people in this thread are misunderstanding how quickly entire squads of players would have been ruled out. The whole thing would have been a farce. No way they could have continued playing, I can’t believe that there are people on here who don’t accept that. Cancelling it all was the only sensible/viable/possible decision.

In about 2 1/2 months whole squads will potentially be out of action. Until then they could of played as two teams playing a game of football behind closed doors would of had very little impact on the spread of the virus. Only a few footballers and managers have got the virus currently and they will be quarantined. There's no way they are going to start up in June or July when the virus is at its peak. 

[ceudmilefailte]

5 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

Nobody would see the matches to be entertained though would they? Except for the small percentage of televised games of course. 

This virus is going to go through the population like a dose of salts once it hits its peak. Not being able to watch sport on the telly is going to be the least of our worries. 

The percentage of people who go to games is far smaller than the figure that watches games on TV. Also there are TV cameras at all games these day..

Thats neither here nor there,

I give up on trying to explain the sociological reasons to continue to conduct life as normal as is possible at times such as this.

It would appear that I am wrong and the decent into chaos is inevitable

 

[ceudmilefailte]

25 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

The team bus costs money. Running/renting training grounds costs money. Providing food and refreshments for players costs money. How are teams like Albion Rovers and Clyde going to meet these costs without any gate money?

Nobody is talking about that level of football. 

[dohadeer]

7 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

In about 2 1/2 months whole squads will potentially be out of action. Until then they could of played as two teams playing a game of football behind closed doors would of had very little impact on the spread of the virus. Only a few footballers and managers have got the virus currently and they will be quarantined. There's no way they are going to start up in June or July when the virus is at its peak. 

I don’t understand your point.

You know that football isn’t just 22 people turning up on a Saturday and having a kick about outdoors?

Full teams would have been wiped out within weeks. There’s no reason to put people’s families and other people at risk.

[Texas Pete]

4 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Nobody is talking about that level of football. 

Of course they are. Are you suggesting that the Premiership should still be playing but the lower leagues shouldn’t be? Where have you stated that previously? I must have missed it. 

[Texas Pete]

11 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

The percentage of people who go to games is far smaller than the figure that watches games on TV. Also there are TV cameras at all games these day..

Thats neither here nor there,

I give up on trying to explain the sociological reasons to continue to conduct life as normal as is possible at times such as this.

It would appear that I am wrong and the decent into chaos is inevitable

 

Are you suggesting you are right and the experts making these decisions are wrong? 

[mccaughey85]

1 minute ago, dohadeer said:

I don’t understand your point.

You know that football isn’t just 22 people turning up on a Saturday and having a kick about outdoors?

Full teams would have been wiped out within weeks. There’s no reason to put people’s families and other people at risk.

Full teams won't be wiped out in weeks. Maybe in two months there will be large percentages of the population with the virus. Atm there is hardly anybody with the virus. It will be at least a month before it hits 5 percent of the population. The projected worst point is three months away. 50 ppl meeting in a stadium twice a week will have very little bearing on the spread of the virus especially as clubs have doctors that can test everyday and then quarantine anyone that has the virus. Football is effectively wasting two months for no real reason when they could tie loose ends and get football seasons done and dusted before this thing kicks off Big time. 

[dohadeer]

3 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Full teams won't be wiped out in weeks. Maybe in two months there will be large percentages of the population with the virus. Atm there is hardly anybody with the virus. It will be at least a month before it hits 5 percent of the population. The projected worst point is three months away. 50 ppl meeting in a stadium twice a week will have very little bearing on the spread of the virus especially as clubs have doctors that can test everyday and then quarantine anyone that has the virus. Football is effectively wasting two months for no real reason when they could tie loose ends and get football seasons done and dusted before this thing kicks off Big time. 

The virus was already spreading rapidly through football I think though? 

‘50 people meeting in a stadium twice a week’ is a totally inaccurate description of how football operates.

I think that very few people wanted football to continue behind closed doors. You are in a very small minority there.

[ceudmilefailte]

5 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

Are you suggesting you are right and the experts making these decisions are wrong? 

I'm looking at it one way those with a financial interest are looking at it another way.

Who are the experts who told football clubs to stop competing? 

[Texas Pete]

1 minute ago, ceudmilefailte said:

I'm looking at it one way those with a financial interest are looking at it another way.

Who are the experts who told football clubs to stop competing? 

I wasn’t really talking about football. Europe is closing down restaurants, pubs and shops, presumably on advice of experts. This isn’t exactly conducting life as normal. 

[ceudmilefailte]

5 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

I wasn’t really talking about football. Europe is closing down restaurants, pubs and shops, presumably on advice of experts. This isn’t exactly conducting life as normal. 

Perhaps the experts should look at the schools next or were the ones involved with football ahead of the game so to speak. Every effort is being made to continue as normal in other areas so as cut back on the inevitable social shut down. I cant see any reason why football should have been any different.

Football associations made these desicions not experts.