I was delighted to read the Scottish Government’s clinical director, Jason Leitch, say there are strong advocates from within the Government that football fans will at one point be encouraged to leave pubs when watching games and instead attend in socially distanced numbers at outdoor stadiums.
It will not apparently happen next month, but there may be a trial when the national flags can fly when Scotland team plays in September.
You and I can only wonder when the Government’s scientists will find evidence that an easily policed outdoor arena will become as safe from Covid-19 as thousands of indoor pubs across Scotland.
Pubs, with their drinking, exchange of money, regular toilet use and the legendary increase in judgement that comes after alcohol is consumed, are clearly the safest places to watch football. If this was not the case, your government would stop fans gathering in them to cheer on their teams and celebrate goals.
And remember, to make watching football in pubs extra safe, the government decided you do not need to wear masks when inside a pub. Yes, masks are important, but only in shops, if you go to a pub this weekend to watch football, none of those shouting and celebrating will be wearing a mask.
By contrast, football stadiums, with their designated and easily dispersed seating, blanket CCTV monitored from dedicated police facilities, all that outdoor air and with masks used by everyone in a spectator area, are clearly more dangerous to public health than gatherings in pubs.
They would not be able to sell alcohol at football stadiums, so unlike pubs, would need to rely on the sober judgement of spectators to ensure safety procedures were respected. And I don’t need to tell you how ineffective sober judgement is compared to how easily drunk people find following rules.
To suggest that it is worse (as I stupidly thought) for public health to gather in pubs to watch games this weekend, instead of socially distances in stadiums, is ridiculous. If this was not the case, what would it say about your governments regard for you or your health?
This is typical of recent politicians’ involvement in football. Not content will kettling fans, or trying to make political dissent illegal, they are happy to throw the masses they pretend to care about together in pubs at greater risk to public health, rather than actually listen to reason from outside their logic-defying bubble. Whenever I see these clowns I think of thought-control charlatans. This is a a farce, the Government know it, football knows it and we all know it. Those not prepared to admit it should consider how much thought control they are already under.
377 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- »
Celtic spend £5M on a goalkeeper, another severe boot in the haw maws for the haters.
Everyone has different opinions.Paul is entitled to his.Is he not?I don’t agree with Paul,but that is of no consequence.Too many too eager to have a pop.You can disagree without alluding to anything else.
Regards Barry Fry.He has a very saleable asset,and he wants as much money as he can.Thats his job.If someone offered us 20 million for Eddy,and we accepted,would be chaos on here.Frys problem is,Toney wants to go to Celtic.I did notice today on a BBC,yuk,report,that overnight,Brentford offer miraculously went from 6 million,to 9 million.I would think,6 million,and bonuses with sell on clause would be hard to turn down.If we are resigned to losing Eddy next year,money well spent.
Its all Greek to me.
Hail Hail
The issue for fans attending football games (or any other sports stadium) is not necessarily when the spectators are in the stadium, relatively speaking that’s the easy part. It’s the before and after the game that’s problematic; a lot of people in a short period of time all going to the same place on public transport, congregating outside the same scenario afterwards. Although to be fair I’m still surprised that pubs in Scotland are open all you say in your article Paul 67 Is correct.
Anyway here’s to 10 in a row!
Welcome to w Celtic family Vasilis Barkas
May your days with us be trophy laden.
TURKEYBHOY on 30TH JULY 2020 1:23 PM
‘Everyone has different opinions.Paul is entitled to his.Is he not?’
###
So long as his opinion is the same as Peter Lawwell’s he’ll be OK.
Bread, butter etc.
It’s a little easier for me to say and I appreciate the economic concerns that business owners have but I can’t for the life of me comprehend why most folks just batten down the hatches for the year and see where we come out the other side?
Your health, our health is our wealth.
We’re still exceptionally wary of visiting the store , never mind the pub or Celtic Park.
It’ll be a very, very long time before we venture into any large scale “congregations” and anyway – with few exceptions, the pub / resto experience is gone, from what I hear from friends and neighbours.
Staycation CSC
Cannae wait to read all the posts from the SNP drones telling us its “too dangerous” to go to Parkhead.
As Paul has set out, it’s safe to watch games in pubs. I went into a couple of pubs for the first time last week and they are just not capable of proper social distancing.
“If you were to show an opera in a bar, cafe, bistro type environment, you would trust the patrons to sit and enjoy the event and behave themselves.”
A few of my mates got pished and went to see Swan Lake. After ten minutes they started shouting, “C’moan the burdz!” and throwing bits of bread on the stage…
It really would not be so difficult,as we have seen in France to get some fans in safely,and out.
2 thousand in each of the stands,=8 thousand per game.One thousand in each level,entering and leaving by different means.To accommodate 6,000 fans in the 3 stands which hold 50,000 is surely feasible.
Many on here,dont want to go,but I know many desperate to be allowed back.7 or 8,000 inside Celtic Park,properly spread out,which can be done by ST you would be hard pushed to notice.
☝️Fake news…
NOT safe to watch in pubs
Bada,
Earlier ” Big Dog Barkas”
:)
Way Earlier – BSR ” The Athenian Fenian”
:)
Love it.
:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
HH.
WBC,
Brilliant.
TURKEYBHOY on 30TH JULY 2020 1:23 PM
Using the term “charlatan government” is more than simply expressing an opinion….
Football fans are treated differently. That’s just a fact.
Pubs and cinemas are indoor venues that will be open while Celtic Park will be completely empty.
The same government that gave you the Offensive Behaviour at Football act seems to be above criticism.
This article is driven by greed. Simples
Great to see VB signed and sealed
Well done Celtic
ONENIGHTINLISBON on 30TH JULY 2020 1:40 PM
Using the term “charlatan government” is more than simply expressing an opinion….
_____
Jesus wept.
It’s politics. Charlatan is tame compared to what you will hear elsewhere.
Delighted that we have our big Dutch/Greek goalie here for 10 in a row! 🍀👌
Everything is politics
and Celtic is the political football in scoddland that gets kicked aboooot by every hun under the Sun.
I’m no fan of the SNP but I think it’s clear to the fair minded that most Recent decisions have been based on science and not politics (within reason before the usual culprits jump in)
GO TELL THE SPARTIM on 30TH JULY 2020 1:41 PM
This article is driven by greed. Simple
—————-
Celtic already have the season ticket money , opening a stadium with a massively reduced capacity and all social distancing measures will surely cost Celtic money??
The Huddle
Do you honestly think that PL has been driving this based on the supporters interests ?
Other revenue streams are required
Today’s leader from P67, in a word – codswallop.
PÓGMATHONYAHUN AKA LAIRD OF THE SMILES on 30TH JULY 2020 1:56 PM
Ditto
Fáilte roimh Barkas.
On returning to Celtic Park for a match day, I can’t see myself attending a game there before 2021, even if the rules are relaxed.
Stay safe & HH
Well done TIMALOY29, @13:34 in the words of dick dastardly “here is your medal” for the first post about the SNP and it goes to the anti side, belittling other peoples opinions before they have been made. Are you sure your real name isn’t Mutley72?
Personally, the only 2 people I pay attention to at this time with relation to the pandemic are Nicola Sturgeon and Jason Leitch. If/when they say it is safe to go to Celtic Park, then I will happily return.
GO TELL THE SPARTIM on 30TH JULY 2020 1:53 PM
The Huddle
Do you honestly think that PL has been driving this based on the supporters interests ?
Other revenue streams are required
———————
Of course there’s other revenue streams but they won’t be selling food/drink or any hospitality, surely? That leaves match day sponsorship, anything else?
They have season ticket money which is the bulk of our income, they are also able to sell each match live online to non season ticket holders
Are the experts that some lads on here are putting their trust in the same experts that let Sevco and Leverkusen go ahead ?
The same ones that were happy to let the Glasgow Derby go ahead last March ?
The same ones that broke their own lock down rules ?
Those experts ?
I agree Paul.
There are plenty on here not keen on returning to Celtic Park soon. That is their prerogative.
As someone who was struck with a life changing illness 3 years ago, I’m willing to take my chances.
I can’t wait to be back cheering on the championship
The Huddle
Does that answer why PL is doing it? They’re not going to make money at the start, there is the chance that it would cost more money if we postponed it indefinitely there’s no way this is being done to give us supporters the match day experience it’s a desire for our cash (for whatever reason) and the love of money is the root of all evil, I once read.
Is it today or tomorrow when deferred wages are due to be paid at the bigotdome
Who decides who is allowed to attend the games?
I’m sure those who have paid for ‘elite seating’ will be looking to attend before all and sundry are allowed in. They’ll also be expecting to use the bar facilities they paid for as part of their subscription. As a past member of Club Celtic the corridors between the lounges and the entrances into the stadium and toilets are not made for social distancing.
Also wearing a mask does not exempt you from keeping the minimum social distance required – a common misconception.
great photo of Barkas and the trophies but breaks my heart that the Veiola Cup isn’t there
Some rubbish being spouted.PL greed has inspired this article.Really? Just what would Celtic make out of letting say 7 or 8000,fans into the stadium.We would have Police to pay,Stewards to pay,and any other expenses involved with crowds.What would we get out of it?Nothing.No food outlets inside stadium open,for all that would make if they were.As has been said,ST monies in the bank.
PL has stated countless times,he will pursue the idea of fans being safely allowed into the stadium.His target was 5000.Is it impossible to believe,he is trying to honour this promise.I said earlier,you would not notice 7,000 fans inside Celtic Park,why not let them have a trial run,as requested.Far too many only prepared to snipe.
Anyone remember the Apollo 13 mission, its story told in the 1995 movie?
After an explosion that wiped out its oxygen tanks half way to the moon, the mission necessarily is aborted and the immediate problem is how to return the crew to earth alive.
Oxygen was needed not only for breathing, but also provided electricity and water via a fuel cell which powered the battery. Whatever oxygen was left would sustain the crew for a given number of days only, but could not be used to power the craft. Whatever power was left in the battery was all they had to work with to run the life support systems, propulsion, the navigation and guidance system, heating and lighting, air con, the myriad other crucial electrically powered functions of the space craft.
The crew removed to the lunar module and the command module was powered down to conserve energy. Crucially, they needed sufficient power in the battery remaining to be able to power up the command module ahead of reentry, while still maintaining life on board in the meantime.
This was quite the trick to pull off. Get it wrong and either the crew would die from suffocation/asphyxiation/hypothermia, or there wouldn’t be enough power remaining to be able to reenter Earth’s atmosphere and land safely.
In order to work out the problem,the engineers used a model, shutting down each of the ships functions in turn then powering up the control module to determine how much power they needed, and how much they could afford to use to keep the crew alive. They figured out that they could keep the crew alive with just 300W of power, and could shut down everything else meantime hopeful that there would be enough left in the batteries to power up when the time came.
Now they had figured out the problem, they then had to power up the various electrical functions of the system in a sequence that wouldn’t crash it. Every function drew a particular load when starting up, and if the load was too high the system would crash. The sequence of restart was as important as the power conservation. More trial, more error.
I mention this only because it strikes me as analogous to what we’re trying to do in this Covid-19 disaster.
Through the Lockdown, we have (in Scotland) managed to drive infection in the community down to relatively low levels, and the desire is to get back to normal life as soon as possible.
Because the virus is spread by human social activity, everything we do carries a risk. Some activities are essential whatever the risk – Healthcare, Food and Energy and so on. Others are important but high risk – public transport for instance. But there are myriad activities we want to be able to return to, each with a risk attached, whether working, shopping, hospitality, sport and leisure, tourism, overseas travel and so on.
One of the most important is education, particularly school education to the wellbeing of children. The research suggests the risk attached to schools is a function of the extent of community infection – the more prevalent the infection, the higher the risk to/in schools. In Scotland, the objective for the past 3 months has been to achieve the lowest possible prevalence in the community in order that schools (and other activities) can return.
If we allow that each activity carries a risk, the likelihood of the infection returning is essentially the sum of the risks of each activity allowed.
As with the Apollo guys, we need to figure out not only how much risk we can manage, but also get the sequence of each activity right too. We need to decide how much and which aspects of normal life we want to return without crashing the system.
Risk is a function of the likelihood of infection multiplied by the number of people infected. It’s a trade off. High risk activities with low numbers of people might be preferable to low risk activities with large numbers of people, particularly if the risk can be mitigated – face masks or distancing or quarantine or whatever.
And so we have a long list of things that constitute normal life, each with an associated risk rating, and a whole host of people with different priorities who want different things reopened.
Tim Martin wants his Witherspoons pubs to be allowed to pack them in again. Ryanair wants quarantine removed for Spanish holidays. Odeon wants cinemas opened. Equity the theatres. Trump his Scottish hotels for (presumably hydroxychloroquine-dosed) US golf tourists.
Employers want workplaces reopened, working parents need schools and childcare reopened.
And Paul wants fans at football matches.
It’s a risk-reward bun fight, everyone fighting for their own reward, but insisting the risk is carried by everyone else. We can only allow so many things, carry so much risk, manage so many additional infections, before we crash the system and lose the mission.
Setting aside whether attendance at school is more important than attendance at football, we have to understand that the risk at the football is not confined to the (doubtless) socially distanced seat. It encompasses the queue outside, the scrum at the bog, the catering, the pressed congestion on the stairs at full time.
But it also encompasses the supporters buses, the trains, the buses, the shared cars to and from the match, and the risk to other folk who cannot avoid the crowds before and after the match.
If there are 1000 people in Scotland this week who are currently infectious, the likelihood is that 10 or more of them would be in a random crowd of 60,000. There’s no way of preventing it, that’s just the simple, inevitable arithmetic of probability.
And those 10 folk got the match how? Train? Bus? Car? Heck, folk fly to Glasgow for the fitba. You can’t look at the infection risk in a socially distanced seat in a disinfected stadium in isolation. You need to look at the sum of it, and many aspects are high risk and involve very large numbers of people. [btw it is not yet permitted to share a car with another household]
It strikes me that perhaps my experience of attending matches is different to Paul’s. Some folk go to the pub before and/or after the match. Some get scooped up on the way. The toilets are too small for the demand, and generally reeked out with smokers. The concourses are teeming and the stairwells packed. And folk shout and sing and grab and jump and doolally generally. It’s not an Easter picnic. It’s moderate to high risk social behaviour from the minute a fan leaves the house to the minute s/he returns home.
We don’t need degrees in epidemiology to figure out that whatever the risk attending football presents, it’s tangible and measurable. Equally, there are other aspects of ‘normal life’ that we have yet to return to, college and university education, for example, which – without wishing to start an argument – are probably more important than fans attending football matches, and which come with their own risks.
We need to return to normal life cognisant of the risks involved, doing whatever is prudent and possible to avoid a recurrence of widespread community infection. Its been done elsewhere in the world, and it can be done here.
But it can’t be done all at once, and there are choices along the way. As we open up society again, the natural choices are those which provide the greatest benefit for the least risk.
I’d suggest that outside of the boardrooms of assorted football clubs, in the long list of the aspects of ‘normal life’ we would like to return to, fans at football matches is towards the bottom, somewhere below driving lessons and public swimming pools maybe.
We can’t have it all, and we certainly can’t have it all at once. If you want fans back at the match, decide which equivalent risks you’re prepared to forego and let’s have the debate about it.
Otherwise it’s all so much self-interest and so little self-awareness.
Soapbox CSC
How many covid deaths have there been in Scotland July?
Leave it to individual choice . If your in the vunerable category then take precautions .
If BLM are allowed-encouraged to gather in public in large numbers -with no spike , then theres no logic in stopping us attending games.