Coronavirus & The Premier League

[ToonArmy]

45 minutes ago, Stan said:

That doesn't make sense. 

Why is an unvaccinated person less likely to require a mask and therefore this means they protect others more? How does that work? 

You wear a mask to stop yourself spreading the virus to other people rather than protect yourself. 

The vaccinated still carry the virus, the vaccine protects them from the effects of it. Those who are in vaccinated are more likely to feel well and be carrying the virus and spread it to those who either can't have (for medical reasons) or those who don't want the vaccine. 

If an unvaccinated person breathes all over a vaccinated person there far less likely to get ill than if a vaccinated person breathes all over the unvaccinated person. 

The fact I'm being called bizzare for pointing this out just demonstrates my pint about ignorance. 

[DeadLinesman]

4 minutes ago, ToonArmy said:

You wear a mask to stop yourself spreading the virus to other people rather than protect yourself. 

The vaccinated still carry the virus, the vaccine protects them from the effects of it. Those who are in vaccinated are more likely to feel well and be carrying the virus and spread it to those who either can't have (for medical reasons) or those who don't want the vaccine. 

If an u vaccinated person breathes all over a vaccinated person there far less likely to get ill than if a vaccinated person breathes all over the unvaccinated person. 

The fact I'm being called bizzare for pointing this out just demonstrates my pint about ignorance. 

No, it’s ignorant to claim unvaccinated people don’t have to wear a mask as much as vaccinated people. We really shouldn’t even need to explain why. You’re as equally responsible, vaccination or no vaccination. In fact, you realise people are asymptomatic with the virus with or without a vaccination yeah? That’s how this thing spread in the first place. Claiming that “oh well, people will feel poorly and not go out if they’ve got it and haven’t been vaccinated” is pretty bizarre.

[Stan]

14 minutes ago, ToonArmy said:

You wear a mask to stop yourself spreading the virus to other people rather than protect yourself. 

The vaccinated still carry the virus, the vaccine protects them from the effects of it. Those who are in vaccinated are more likely to feel well and be carrying the virus and spread it to those who either can't have (for medical reasons) or those who don't want the vaccine. 

If an unvaccinated person breathes all over a vaccinated person there far less likely to get ill than if a vaccinated person breathes all over the unvaccinated person. 

The fact I'm being called bizzare for pointing this out just demonstrates my pint about ignorance. 

So taking your first sentence only, why should someone unvaccinated be less likely to require a mask? If it's to protect other people, should they wear a mask as much as someone else? As @DeadLinesman says, you seem to forget that anyone can be asymptomatic. That includes those who haven't had a jab. So therefore those particular people should wear a mask too? If the virus needs stopping, why can an unvaccinated person go mask-free compared to someone who is vaccinated?

I get that the vaccinated may still carry the virus. But then so can someone who hasn't...

Whether anyone breathes all over anyone else is irrelevant to an extent. 

Anyone - vaccinated or not - has an obligation to be sensible and carry personal responsibility, as suggested from 19th July. 

[Danny]

Definitely feels like it's too soon to be dropping the masks and social distancing measures with the current rise in cases, I hope TFL still insist on it. I'll be wearing one when travelling around London, not just for myself but anyone else who could be at risk/lives with people at risk but have to travel anyway. I think there's a medium between personal responsibility and common sense from the government, if everything is to go back to "normal" then surely you can't complain if you still have to wear a mask in certain places? Seeing as all of your previous "freedoms" will be back.

Personally feel like we're going to see a lot of deaths again but it will be considered manageable for the NHS and as such these people will just be seen as collateral damage. Surely the focus now that most of the country will be vaccinated, and that vaccinations generally mean lower transmission levels, is to try and get the rates of positive tests as low as possible to then make it harder for it to climb again?

I get that things need to open up again and people need to make a living, or more big companies who aren't internet driven need to get back to making big ££££, but the fact we're happy to just risk another wave of deaths with the new variant that may well be lower than the previous ones just so that we can go back to a version of normal that doesn't exist anymore is a bit mindboggling.

Boris saying to use personal responsibility and to learn to live with it is literally just him saying we should accept that people will die (even though when cases are as high as they are now deaths can be prevented), because if the government no longer believe we should be wearing masks and socially distancing then how does the responsibility for that going wrong fall on the people exactly?

[ToonArmy]

12 minutes ago, Danny said:

Definitely feels like it's too soon to be dropping the masks and social distancing measures with the current rise in cases, I hope TFL still insist on it. I'll be wearing one when travelling around London, not just for myself but anyone else who could be at risk/lives with people at risk but have to travel anyway. I think there's a medium between personal responsibility and common sense from the government, if everything is to go back to "normal" then surely you can't complain if you still have to wear a mask in certain places? Seeing as all of your previous "freedoms" will be back.

Personally feel like we're going to see a lot of deaths again but it will be considered manageable for the NHS and as such these people will just be seen as collateral damage. Surely the focus now that most of the country will be vaccinated, and that vaccinations generally mean lower transmission levels, is to try and get the rates of positive tests as low as possible to then make it harder for it to climb again?

I get that things need to open up again and people need to make a living, or more big companies who aren't internet driven need to get back to making big ££££, but the fact we're happy to just risk another wave of deaths with the new variant that may well be lower than the previous ones just so that we can go back to a version of normal that doesn't exist anymore is a bit mindboggling.

Boris saying to use personal responsibility and to learn to live with it is literally just him saying we should accept that people will die (even though when cases are as high as they are now deaths can be prevented), because if the government no longer believe we should be wearing masks and socially distancing then how does the responsibility for that going wrong fall on the people exactly?

Can we please end this big companies narrative. A lot of the hardest hit companies have been small businesses and medium enterprises. 

[Danny]

5 minutes ago, ToonArmy said:

Can we please end this big companies narrative. A lot of the hardest hit companies have been small businesses and medium enterprises. 

I never stated they weren't, but they're not the companies that this government are tied to, who give members of this government more personal motivation to allow them to get back to creating (bigger) profits. As we have seen all pandemic this government are very happy to do favours for their mates when needed.

[ToonArmy]

12 minutes ago, Danny said:

I never stated they weren't, but they're not the companies that this government are tied to, who give members of this government more personal motivation to allow them to get back to creating (bigger) profits. As we have seen all pandemic this government are very happy to do favours for their mates when needed.

Small business owners are some of their core voters, so pressure is likely coming from them as well as big business here. They can't siphon off the money to their mates without voters support to get reelected. 

 

This is probably the biggest political gamble made since Cameron chose a Brexit referendum or May's snap election, and neither of those paid off so make of that what you will. 

[Dan+]

6 hours ago, ToonArmy said:

And here lies the problem. Ignorance. 

If you're vaccinated you can still carry Covid, in fact the unvaccinated probs don't have as much need to wear a mask as the vaccinated as about protecting others not yourself. 

You wonder why we're panicking about this when ignorance is rife and I have to sit next to you lot in the stands. 

This sums it up. You don't have to. This is precisely the biggest problem that's developed in the last 16 months. This feeling that everyone has to give everything up. I'm willing to take that 'risk' so I'll go. If you're not willing to, that's fine, just don't expect everyone else to not.

If we listened to certain people, covid restrictions would become the new way of life. Nothing ever properly open. The majority of businesses eventually ceasing to exist. It's an absolutely miserable, unsustainable way of life and will completely crash society as we know it. We've got the vaccine now and we've offered it to everybody. I don't see what more we can do.

If there's one guarantee I can make it's that people that have supported loads of these measures will wash their hands of claiming they ever did so once they see the real consequences in the next few years. We're costing ourselves billions upon billions as a country for something that we're probably not ever going to get better protection for.

[Dr. Gonzo]

59 minutes ago, Dan said:

If there's one guarantee I can make it's that people that have supported loads of these measures will wash their hands of claiming they ever did so once they see the real consequences in the next few years. We're costing ourselves billions upon billions as a country for something that we're probably not ever going to get better protection for.

Ironically those same people not washing their hands over a year ago are how we got into this fucking mess.

[Danny]

51 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Ironically those same people not washing their hands over a year ago are how we got into this fucking mess.

Pretty sure it was the lack of anal

[RandoEFC+]

The mask thing is a complex issue but what I still don't get is people taking the personal responsibility line with it. Wearing a mask does more to stop you spreading Covid to others than it does to stop you getting it. Therefore by not wearing a mask, you're increasing the risk to others, not so much yourself. It's like if they took away speed limits and left it down to personal responsibility. Irresponsible people aren't just managing the risk to themselves, they're being irresponsible in a way where other people are going to share the consequences.

That said, I don't think the mask thing is the debate that needs having. It's pretty clear that the difference masks make is pretty small compared to the restrictions on gatherings. It's more the tone struck by yesterday's announcement. You tell people they have to wear masks on buses and trains, suddenly there's a reminder that the whole pandemic isn't over and it shifts people's psyche somewhat. Maybe encourages them to be more cautious on a broader level.

I think with football stadiums the risk is going to be low anyway. Looking at some of the Euro crowds it seems pointless limiting numbers because people end up clustered together anyway, it's not like the majority are social distancing. In the UK, with a largely vaccinated population (even moreso by the time the season starts) in an outdoor space you'd imagine that it would be okay. Or at least no worse than if you limited it to 50% capacity and people end up jumping all over each other anyway.

I do think the personal responsibility angle is more relevant when it comes to football matches. If you're worried about the big crowd and new variants, that's fine. Some people who are fully vaccinated would rather wait until the case count settles down again too before returning to fully normal life and I think there's nothing wrong with that.

I don't see a compelling reason at this point why if 40,000 people are happy enough with their personal risk to go and pile in to a football stadium that they shouldn't be allowed to. Yes there will be the odd person at each game who have chosen not to be vaccinated and might be carrying the virus but if you've had your jabs, the number of people we're talking about who pose you even a remote risk is so low.

Schools seem to be the major driver of the case figures at the moment. That's where a strategy needs to be formed above all else and as someone who has a vested interest in it, I do have serious worries about how that part of the problem gets resolved, but football should be fine.

[Smiley Culture]

9 hours ago, DeadLinesman said:

Half the places I go now are filled with people wearing a flower lanyard. It’s like half the population came down with a hidden disability in the last 6 months. There’s always a timescale for these things and I’d say there’s a massive amount of people out there that just no longer give a shit about masks or social distancing and you just can’t police that forever. 

Went and watched Rugby League the other week at London Skolars with the old man. We went into a pub in Wood Green High Street and all the staff were wearing the lanyards. Another girl come in who worked there for her shift, opened the post and said “the lanyards from eBay have come”. Seen loads more of them the last six months and people who have just not bothered at all lately, which I think is aimed at the contradictory behaviour of the government. 

[Honey Honey]

All stadia should give out anti bacterial dry shampoo at games so you can kill the virus sprayed onto the back of your head by the froffing fan in the row behind

[Dave]

1 hour ago, The Premier Steve's said:

All stadia should give out anti bacterial dry shampoo at games so you can kill the virus sprayed onto the back of your head by the froffing fan in the row behind

The only thing I want them to give out at Selhurst Park is absinthe so I don't remember the ninety minutes I'm about to endure afterwards.

[Cicero]

Really is annoying that a lockdown/postponement is inevitable with the primary reason of protecting those that refuse to get vaccinated. 

[Lucas]

What is annoying is teams that can't play due to missing players from Covid and then there's us, losing first teamers by the bucket load to injury, with no option but to play.

Add Dan James and Shackleton now to Bamford, Phillips, Cooper, Rodrigo, Koch and Struijk. Oh and Firpo to suspension. Have the others got 9 out and can compensate?

Don't get me wrong, the situation sounded quite bleak at Spurs a week or so ago but without knowing the true extent of whose got what in each squad, I'd argue we have more first teamers missing than some teams pulling a fast one becauae maybe a couple key players are out. Its a cop out for me tbh.

[Dr. Gonzo]

23 minutes ago, Lucas said:

What is annoying is teams that can't play due to missing players from Covid and then there's us, losing first teamers by the bucket load to injury, with no option but to play.

Add Dan James and Shackleton now to Bamford, Phillips, Cooper, Rodrigo, Koch and Struijk. Oh and Firpo to suspension. Have the others got 9 out and can compensate?

Don't get me wrong, the situation sounded quite bleak at Spurs a week or so ago but without knowing the true extent of whose got what in each squad, I'd argue we have more first teamers missing than some teams pulling a fast one becauae maybe a couple key players are out. Its a cop out for me tbh.

Tbf clubs and players go into seasons knowing there can be injury crises - whereas while the pandemic was still going on, players and clubs can expect that the league might stop in to prevent outbreaks from spreading.

[Lucas]

25 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Tbf clubs and players go into seasons knowing there can be injury crises - whereas while the pandemic was still going on, players and clubs can expect that the league might stop in to prevent outbreaks from spreading.

I get your point but you can see how aggrieved we'd feel. Not to mention teams are going to get rests now whilst we carry on playing.

They should either stop the whole lot given how many games are being called off, and resume when they can or force some teams to utilise their squads. That would be the fair way.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 minute ago, Lucas said:

I get your point but you can see how aggrieved we'd feel. Not to mention teams are going to get rests now whilst we carry on playing.

They should either stop the whole lot given how many games are being called off, and resume when they can or force some teams to utilise their squads. That would be the fair way.

I think they should, at the very least, be postponing this weekends matches.

But yeah, I fully understand how aggrieved you'd feel. Our injury crisis last season was mental, losing all the CBs and then suddenly losing what felt like almost every midfielder. I imagine it's worse at a side like Leeds where you've only got a very small senior squad - 9 injuries out of 17 senior players is absurd.

[Guest]

I think they should postpone this weeks fixtures. It's unfair on the teams that will have a fixture pile up and covid will probably spread more. Postponing it seems like the best thing for me 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Cicero said:

Really is annoying that a lockdown/postponement is inevitable with the primary reason of protecting those that refuse to get vaccinated. 

Is it just protecting them though  or protecting us all? I do agree with you though I think we should put all the anti vaxers on a island and let them deal with it themselves 

[Smiley Culture]

If they go back to behind closed doors football and league suspensions my interest in football will plateau to an all time low. 

[Guest]

22 hours ago, Smiley Culture said:

If they go back to behind closed doors football and league suspensions my interest in football will plateau to an all time low. 

I don't think they will. However football is pretty insignificant really compared to covid so if it is necessary we have to except it

[6666]

Decide the games on video game platforms. Each team selects 11 players and they go up against each other. Best of 11. It's the best solution...

[Dave]

1 hour ago, 6666 said:

Decide the games on video game platforms. Each team selects 11 players and they go up against each other. Best of 11. It's the best solution...

We've not been released as a team on efootball yet.