I appreciate that the Government has been less than clear on football ground restrictions, but, with the season just two weeks away, surely tickets must be sold now, albeit with various caveats on possible rule changes. Waiting for clarity from Boris Johnson is not an option.
(24-07-2021, 03:17 PM)TBP Wrote: [ -> ]I appreciate that the Government has been less than clear on football ground restrictions, but, with the season just two weeks away, surely tickets must be sold now, albeit with various caveats on possible rule changes. Waiting for clarity from Boris Johnson is not an option.
Clarity and Boris Johnson should not be used in the same sentence.
Even though I have done just that
.
i think pompey are being cautious as they don't want to sell STs and then have to tell holders they have to sit at home and watch it on iplayer.
Not sure they can do anything differently except perhaps sell STs that allow you to attend half the games. Very difficult with allseaters unless you buy as a group to allow you entry to alternative games. ??
Wimbledon finals - max capacity no problem. Grand prix motor racing - 120,000 fans no problem. Euro 2020 finals - 65000 fans allowed no problem. So where's the problem with more than 20000 at a league football match
that would imply a logical approach. Actually I am expecting an announcement this week, quite possible tomorrow.
just reading the pingdemic thread. Where would the club be if you are pinged and cannot attend? Last season they could have offered iplayer for that game, but if its not available this season, it could all become a financial and organisational nightmare
(25-07-2021, 09:06 PM)Hammie Wrote: [ -> ]just reading the pingdemic thread. Where would the club be if you are pinged and cannot attend? Last season they could have offered iplayer for that game, but if its not available this season, it could all become a financial and organisational nightmare
Easily solved, either delete the app (recommended) or ignore the ping (it’s only ‘advisory’ anyway).
Why would the club in any way be responsible if someone decides not to turn up?
Time for people to let go of the hand of the state and start taking responsibility for their own actions ffs.
(25-07-2021, 09:59 PM)exgaffer Wrote: [ -> ] (25-07-2021, 09:06 PM)Hammie Wrote: [ -> ]just reading the pingdemic thread. Where would the club be if you are pinged and cannot attend? Last season they could have offered iplayer for that game, but if its not available this season, it could all become a financial and organisational nightmare
Easily solved, either delete the app (recommended) or ignore the ping (it’s only ‘advisory’ anyway).
Why would the club in any way be responsible if someone decides not to turn up?
Time for people to let go of the hand of the state and start taking responsibility for their own actions ffs.
Yes, but if they choose to take responsibility by protecting those around them and obeying the guidance should they suffer financially ? 'taking responsiibilty for your own actions' is not the same as doing whatever you want and sod everyone else.
Personally if I was pinged I'd just take a LFT and still go to the game, but I wouldn't criticise anyone who was more cautious than that.
(26-07-2021, 11:30 AM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (25-07-2021, 09:59 PM)exgaffer Wrote: [ -> ] (25-07-2021, 09:06 PM)Hammie Wrote: [ -> ]just reading the pingdemic thread. Where would the club be if you are pinged and cannot attend? Last season they could have offered iplayer for that game, but if its not available this season, it could all become a financial and organisational nightmare
Easily solved, either delete the app (recommended) or ignore the ping (it’s only ‘advisory’ anyway).
Why would the club in any way be responsible if someone decides not to turn up?
Time for people to let go of the hand of the state and start taking responsibility for their own actions ffs.
Yes, but if they choose to take responsibility by protecting those around them and obeying the guidance should they suffer financially ? 'taking responsiibilty for your own actions' is not the same as doing whatever you want and sod everyone else.
Personally if I was pinged I'd just take a LFT and still go to the game, but I wouldn't criticise anyone who was more cautious than that.
Why should the club suffer financially?
They didn’t issue the ‘guidance’ did they?
The taxpayer shouldn’t get shafted either, life is a risk and you make an assessment every time you go out the front door.
Time to move on.
Gaffer, youve shown yourself to be a right selfish bozo with that attitude. You are old enough to know better and should be setting an example as a 'Gaffer'. You've lost your moral compass moosh.
(26-07-2021, 01:09 PM)Pedalo_menders Wrote: [ -> ]Gaffer, youve shown yourself to be a right selfish bozo with that attitude. You are old enough to know better and should be setting an example as a 'Gaffer'. You've lost your moral compass moosh.
I know Pedalo, let’s all stay at home until we die shall we?
The selfish ones are those who expect others to stop living in order to lessen the already very small risk of their dying from or being incapacitated by Covid.
People who are scared of this virus should shield if that makes them feel better.
Your poor attempt at shaming me has fallen on barren ground mush.
Not trying to shame you (it's an anonymous message board lol)
Just trying to get you to think about what impact you can have on people around you. And to encourage you to use your powers for good, even if that means some moderate inconvenience.
(26-07-2021, 03:32 PM)Pedalo_menders Wrote: [ -> ]Not trying to shame you (it's an anonymous message board lol)
Just trying to get you to think about what impact you can have on people around you. And to encourage you to use your powers for good, even if that means some moderate inconvenience.
Good point about the anonymity Pedalo
.
I’m one of the feckers supposedly at greatest risk ffs, but at my age every minute is precious and losing some is more than a ‘moderate inconvenience’.
I do wear masks on crowded trains and obviously if I had any symptoms I would isolate. However, we are pretty much all double jabbed now and have endured lockdowns of one type or another for a year and a half now, we have done all we can do and it now has to be paid for, we need to get on with it imho.
there is still a big gap in jabbedness, the under thirties are leaving themselves vulnerable in large numbers. I'm not sure of the age range at Fratton Park but most of football includes large number of young male adults, which are the group leaving themselves and then those around them more vulnerable (the more infections = the more likely number of variants. .
The situation is improving but this is a big issue as we head into the football season.
(26-07-2021, 05:09 PM)Hammie Wrote: [ -> ]there is still a big gap in jabbedness, the under thirties are leaving themselves vulnerable in large numbers. I'm not sure of the age range at Fratton Park but most of football includes large number of young male adults, which are the group leaving themselves and then those around them more vulnerable (the more infections = the more likely number of variants. .
The situation is improving but this is a big issue as we head into the football season.
People in the age range you speak of have a much higher risk of dying from something else than Covid Hammie. All the significant age ranges have been double jabbed and everyone else has been given the option of a jab. They can’t be forced to have one, so it’s for them to make the choice.
Having the jab does not prevent infection does it? It just means the effects will be less severe.
As for variants, all viruses mutate, hence the requirement of annual flu jabs.
Meanwhile, 50,000 dementia diagnoses have been missed and there have been 300,000 fewer hospital admissions for cancer. God knows how many heart problems, diabetes diagnoses etc. have been missed. There are also millions of operations that have not taken place. Covid is a long way down the list of our concerns at the moment.
Gaffer, how can you complain about the thousands of other problems caused by the hospitals being overstretched by covid cases ????
You were opposed to the measures being introduced to reduce human contact and hence reduce the hospital numbers for Covid, which just about managed to prevent them from being overrun in most places. If you had had your way nothing else would have been treated in any hospitals and the problems you are highlighting now would have been many times worse with a broken NHS less well placed to deal with the backlog.
You are absolutely right that Covid is probably no longer the biggest health problem faced by the country, but without measures like isolation & mass testing we have seen it has the potential to multiply exponentially and fill the hospitals again ... its a bit worrying that this week, just as we can see the light at the end of the tunnel with case numbers decreasing day on day, hosipitals are warning that they are still seeing cases increase day on day.
People 'taking personal responsibility' is not what we need right now if that means people only worrying, or not worrying, if they themselves catch it. What we need is people taking 'community responsibility' and testing regualrly then isolating if they are positive. The testing capability to do this is there now with the end being in sight now is not the time to throw it all away and put at risk a further increase in untreated cancer, dementia etc cases.
(27-07-2021, 08:48 AM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]Gaffer, how can you complain about the thousands of other problems caused by the hospitals being overstretched by covid cases ????
You were opposed to the measures being introduced to reduce human contact and hence reduce the hospital numbers for Covid, which just about managed to prevent them from being overrun in most places. If you had had your way nothing else would have been treated in any hospitals and the problems you are highlighting now would have been many times worse with a broken NHS less well placed to deal with the backlog.
You are absolutely right that Covid is probably no longer the biggest health problem faced by the country, but without measures like isolation & mass testing we have seen it has the potential to multiply exponentially and fill the hospitals again ... its a bit worrying that this week, just as we can see the light at the end of the tunnel with case numbers decreasing day on day, hosipitals are warning that they are still seeing cases increase day on day.
People 'taking personal responsibility' is not what we need right now if that means people only worrying, or not worrying, if they themselves catch it. What we need is people taking 'community responsibility' and testing regualrly then isolating if they are positive. The testing capability to do this is there now with the end being in sight now is not the time to throw it all away and put at risk a further increase in untreated cancer, dementia etc cases.
That is, as usual, cobblers Deep.
The numbers of people who die because the NHS has become a ‘single condition’ service will far outweigh the numbers who died of (or more often with) Covid.
We now have an effectively two tier system where the relatively well off are paying privately for routine procedures, everybody else has to join the impossibly long queues.
What should have happened, as I’ve said many times, is that the vulnerable should have been shielded and not transferred willy nilly between hospitals and care homes. The young have been at virtually no risk from Covid from the word go, so the economy should have remained fully open so we didn’t run up the obscene bill that will take decades to pay off.
Now we have this ping fiasco which encourages people who are at no risk to isolate, it relies on Bluetooth which can go through walls, the virus cannot. Pretty much all the ‘vulnerable’ have had two jabs, that’s as good as it’s going to get.
The ‘cure’ will turn out to be far worse than the disease itself.
It’s been a shitshow from start to finish, now they are talking about ‘passports’ and tests in order to live a ‘normal’ life. That is definitely the thin end of the wedge and should be resisted. If we had to rely on people like you to do that we might as well roll over now.
And why did it become virtually (but not totally) a single condition service ? Because of the high number of Covid cases, caused by too much human contact, and you were opposed to the measures to cut down human contact. There is no getting away from the fact that your 'solution' would just have made the problem many times worse.
Or are you saying the hospitals should not have taken in and saved thousands of people with Covid ?
The main problem is that this is a worldwide pandemic and just because we’re ahead of the curve doesn’t mean we’re OK.
Regardless what was done right or wrong or whether we should’ve locked down or not , we’re all going to be paying for this for at least the next decade.
Anyway back to football , are Ipswich buying every fecker on the market. Cook is buying a team to get promoted although some of these players aren’t good enough ( for the championship),if they do .
(27-07-2021, 09:47 AM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]And why did it become virtually (but not totally) a single condition service ? Because of the high number of Covid cases, caused by too much human contact, and you were opposed to the measures to cut down human contact. There is no getting away from the fact that your 'solution' would just have made the problem many times worse.
Or are you saying the hospitals should not have taken in and saved thousands of people with Covid ?
My ‘solution’ is supported by a lot of doctors and epidemiologists Deep.
I was opposed to shutting everything down when most of the population was not at risk, yes I was, and still am.
We will never get rid of the virus, it will be with us as flu is with us. You will probably get more flu deaths next year (where are all the flu deaths by the way?), that is also spread by human contact, are you suggesting we should shut down for that too?
Vaccinate and carry on is the only way.
If we carry on locking down we won’t have the money to do any of it.
No-one is saying we should lock down again now are they ?? Why have you made that up just to argue against it ?
Lockdown achieved it's objective the first time because the hospitals just managed to keep going with the level of cases being reduced by the reduction in contacts, but it was touch and go in some areas of the country. Like the rest of the world found, it was clearly necessary then because of the lack of alternative methods, with no mass testing capability and no vaccines.
The second lockdown was more debatable, but the numbers in hospital were still greater than the first wave.
Still waiting for you to explain how your plans to have increased the number of cases by allowing more human contact in the first wave would have helped the hospitals cope with dementia & cancer patients better than they managed.
As for now, no-one is suggesting more lockdowns, just common sense measures to keep numbers under control (like testing and isolating when you have been in contact with it). Not rocket science, just common sense personal responsibility of the right kind.
And suggesting lockdowns for Flu ? Are you mad ? Again you are making up stuff just to argue against it. No-one has ever suggested that because hospitals have never been totally overrun by flu cases, flu has never stopped hospitals dealing with cancer & dementia etc like Covid did, and we have a vaccine that works very well to protect the vulnerable.
Poor old Deep actually believes the government figures. A case isn't a case unless it is systematic.
Approx half of covid admissions contracted covid in hospital. Out of 128k covid deaths there will be well over half that were due to other causes, probably a conservative estimate.
I don't need anyone to protect me thanks very much, when the fuck did that become a thing? You're sick you isolate and has always been thus....until Covid!!
(27-07-2021, 04:22 PM)Jizbag Wrote: [ -> ]Poor old Deep actually believes the government figures. A case isn't a case unless it is systematic.
Approx half of covid admissions contracted covid in hospital. Out of 128k covid deaths there will be well over half that were due to other causes, probably a conservative estimate.
I don't need anyone to protect me thanks very much, when the fuck did that become a thing? You're sick you isolate and has always been thus....until Covid!!
A case isn't a case unless it is systematic ? WTF does that mean ? What is a systematic case when it's at home ?
And no, I wouldn't believe a word that this government says, but yes I trust the NHS to count numbers of people going into hospitals and to report those numbers correctly. I also know enough people working in the NHS to believe the strain they were under from first hand accounts. Why would they lie ? Why would you not trust the NHS ?
(27-07-2021, 04:53 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (27-07-2021, 04:22 PM)Jizbag Wrote: [ -> ]Poor old Deep actually believes the government figures. A case isn't a case unless it is systematic.
Approx half of covid admissions contracted covid in hospital. Out of 128k covid deaths there will be well over half that were due to other causes, probably a conservative estimate.
I don't need anyone to protect me thanks very much, when the fuck did that become a thing? You're sick you isolate and has always been thus....until Covid!!
A case isn't a case unless it is systematic ? WTF does that mean ? What is a systematic case when it's at home ?
And no, I wouldn't believe a word that this government says, but yes I trust the NHS to count numbers of people going into hospitals and to report those numbers correctly. I also know enough people working in the NHS to believe the strain they were under from first hand accounts. Why would they lie ? Why would you not trust the NHS ?
My apologies Deep, I meant symptomatic. (auto correct)