Skip to content

EFL set to suspend season

1235

Comments

  • What @DevC has declared to be 'expert advice' is at odds with the most respected virologists in Germany who are approaching the issue from the perspective of protecting the most vulnerable in society.
    The 'herd immunity' tactic the Tories are relying on is on very shaky ground (to put it politely on a family friendly message board) as there is little evidence that you are immune to the virus after having caught it once.

  • Question for @DevC

    Is we were in the US on an MLS forum, would you be arguing to trust Trump and Pence to interpret the experts and making the best decision?

    I accept that my circumstances may be clouding my logic and judgement, but I wouldn’t wish what I have on anyone.

  • @DevC said:
    I think this might be the last post I make on this subject.

    So you are not prepared (or unable) to answer my serious question posted at 10.38?

  • Good, helpful summary @aloysius thank you.

    And I hate those ‘fun’ people at parties anyway...

  • I have been asked too "serious" questions which I will answer. That's it then. This is a football forum, not a national health emergency forum.

    First of all @Mooneyman's one. As I understand it, that is why are we doing things differently than some other countries. So we shouldn't we ignore our medical advisers recommendations then. As I understand it our actions will pretty much follow other countries actions, we are just doing it slightly later as we are slightly further back in the spread and doing so now is judged by the experts to be counter=productive. As far as I know the only people giving specific advice based on the current situation in the UK is the UK medical advisors. They are experts in their field. I am not. I am prepared to back their judgement.

    Secondly @drcongo. I have to say with the greatest respect his point was exactly what I see as the worst aspects of the internet. Everyone has to be black or white, good or evil. I don't see it that way. Your suggestion as I understand it is that Johnson ( a man I profoundly disagree with on many issues) has deliberately gone against medical advice for political benefit. You also suggest that medical advisers have gone along with that decision for their own personal benefit. All this on the biggest medical emergency that those medical advisers have dealt with in their lives, in which doing the wrong thing will potentially cost thousands of lives. Aside from the reality that I see no political benefit for Johnson in the action he has taken - the opposite in fact, I simply don't see it as credible that medical advisers in particular or Johnson himself for that matter would do that. Their advice may be wrong, but I don't think there is some Bond Villain conspiracy here. I think it is their honest opinion. I think the PM is obliged to follow that advice.

    By the way I think @ReadingMarginalista comment that the government are as good as abandoning the most vulnerable is utterly disgraceful. I have no doubt that the Government are trying to minimise the impact of this virus. Desperately difficult life or death decisions may well need to be made, some of which will very likely be wrong in hindsight. Good grief, I find myself defending Johnson - strange strange times indeed.

  • Northern Irish schools shutting for at least 16 weeks - it seems unlikely football will restart before July at the earliest.

  • I understand what your saying now Dev, that the WHO's medical experts are talking a load of bollox and they should listen to Boris's advisers!

  • Interesting read from the Lancet.

    How will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic? - The Lancet

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30567-5/fulltext

    And as for how much crap and bullshit people in, or close to, power are prepared to tolerate from their leaders before they throw in the towel, have a read of Bob Woodward’s Fear: Trump in the Whitehouse. Whilst some of his team are as narrow-minded and irrational as he is, some were not. And yet they often hung around for some considerable time, in part perhaps hoping to ‘steer’ the President away from his crazier ideas.

    Whether Boris has the best advice going and is listening or a group of advisors he ignores who fear for their jobs and so go along, or stay quiet for now and hope to influence him to choose the right course down the line, only time and history will tell. My suspicion is that, like most advice, when dealing with unknowns, uncertainty and fast paced events, the advice has to be hedged and in this case the hedge is a close one. Boris seems to be a man willing to gamble to ‘win’ and on may things, takes tbe position he thinks will give him victory rather rather than act on conviction. If here, as seems, he has take the opposite hedge bet to other countries and it pays off, he’ll be hailed as the great leader.

  • edited March 2020

    .

  • Its comments like that @mooneyman that make me think that I should leave discussion of this matter to minds such as yours.

  • With respect Dev, neither of us know the optimum method of limiting the damage of this pandemic. I just prefer to have more regard to the WHO experts whose advice is radically different to our Government advisors and is being followed by most countries. Hopefully a vaccine will be available sooner or later particularly for those with underlying health conditions.

  • But @mooneyman, why would you take the advice of every single expert in the world except one, when, like Dev, you could just believe the other one? The one who would lose his job if he didn’t do what he was told, which is coincidentally to take a line that has the least effect on GDP.

  • What have I missed?

  • @Manboobs, if I'm reading and interpreting this Lancet article correctly isn't this at least in part what Boris has been advocating as the official government advise (so far). Even the figure showing social distance flattening the curve is the one I've seen accompanying the Government advise.
    Maybe that's the point you were making?

    "School closure, a major pillar of the response to pandemic influenza A,14 is unlikely to be effective given the apparent low rate of infection among children, although data are scarce. Avoiding large gatherings of people will reduce the number of super-spreading events; however, if prolonged contact is required for transmission, this measure might only reduce a small proportion of transmissions. Therefore, broader-scale social distancing is likely to be needed, as was put in place in China. This measure prevents transmission from symptomatic and non-symptomatic cases, hence flattening the epidemic and pushing the peak further into the future."

    "Individual behaviour will be crucial to control the spread of COVID-19. Personal, rather than government action, in western democracies might be the most important issue. Early self-isolation, seeking medical advice remotely unless symptoms are severe, and social distancing are key."

  • @DevC - Having a policy of relying on infecting the vast majority of population with a disease that is disproportionately lethal for the most vulnerable in society in the hope that the herd immunity effect happens could reasonably be described as that. Attempting to buy time with the measures seen in other countries while a vaccine is developed seems a far saner and more humane approach, albeit one that will incur a greater financial cost.

  • Coronavirus will disproportionately kill the old, the poor and the most vulnerable in society. Like austerity, this policy is deliberately targeted at these groups because this government sees them as a barrier to their own riches. It’s eugenics.

  • @drcongo said:
    Coronavirus will disproportionately kill the old, the poor and the most vulnerable in society. Like austerity, this policy is deliberately targeted at these groups because this government sees them as a barrier to their own riches. It’s eugenics.

    Enjoyed meeting you earlier in the season, @drcongo, but this is rather toxic nonsense.

  • Enjoyed meeting you too @HCblue, but I stand by it. The whole UK approach to this issue has been an economic one, partly based on the fact that they’ve spent 10 years decimating the hospitals and public services that we now need to cope.

  • Not convinced the Tories want old people to die. They have to get votes from somewhere.

  • @drcongo said:
    Coronavirus will disproportionately kill the old, the poor and the most vulnerable in society. Like austerity, this policy is deliberately targeted at these groups because this government sees them as a barrier to their own riches. It’s eugenics.

    Beware Hanlon’s Razor @drcongo

    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

  • @Lloyd2084 said:

    @drcongo said:
    Coronavirus will disproportionately kill the old, the poor and the most vulnerable in society. Like austerity, this policy is deliberately targeted at these groups because this government sees them as a barrier to their own riches. It’s eugenics.

    Beware Hanlon’s Razor @drcongo

    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

    I don’t think it’s necessarily malice on the part of the Tories, but it’s definitely a total lack of empathy.

    A perfect example of Disaster Capitalism.

  • @drcongo said:
    Coronavirus will disproportionately kill the old, the poor and the most vulnerable in society. Like austerity, this policy is deliberately targeted at these groups because this government sees them as a barrier to their own riches. It’s eugenics.

    Good God!

  • There's some interesting discussion going on here for anyone interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22577132

    That site is full of very smart people (though mostly from fields unrelated to virology) from all over the world.

  • @Twizz said:
    @Manboobs, if I'm reading and interpreting this Lancet article correctly isn't this at least in part what Boris has been advocating as the official government advise (so far). Even the figure showing social distance flattening the curve is the one I've seen accompanying the Government advise.
    Maybe that's the point you were making?

    "School closure, a major pillar of the response to pandemic influenza A,14 is unlikely to be effective given the apparent low rate of infection among children, although data are scarce. Avoiding large gatherings of people will reduce the number of super-spreading events; however, if prolonged contact is required for transmission, this measure might only reduce a small proportion of transmissions. Therefore, broader-scale social distancing is likely to be needed, as was put in place in China. This measure prevents transmission from symptomatic and non-symptomatic cases, hence flattening the epidemic and pushing the peak further into the future."

    "Individual behaviour will be crucial to control the spread of COVID-19. Personal, rather than government action, in western democracies might be the most important issue. Early self-isolation, seeking medical advice remotely unless symptoms are severe, and social distancing are key."

    That’s how I read it, that the authors of this article seem broadly in agreement with government policy. But I note today that a large number of scientists have called for a rethink in an open letter. Most are mathematicians and modellers of complex systems, some bio scientists, some PhD students and some who have expertise in areas less obviously related. As I said before, I don’t think the UK government are plain wrong (or evil) because this is not an easy problem to solve. Even for epidemiologists this is a new situation because pandemics are rare and the circumstances in which each occurs are, due to many factors, unique. So I don’t think you can say with certainty that an approach taken before will have the same effectiveness. Even an approach taken in one country may not be the best fit for another. Take lockdowns for example. China’s approach seemed effective once rolling. Restrict part of the country hard and mobilise other parts to resource it. Providing hospital respirators for example.

    Arguably the best solution in Europe would have been to quarantine Italy fast and for other countries to have provided immediate aid and resource. Instead each country seems to be isolating itself from neighbours once it appears. I hope the news coverage of flight bans and quarantined arrivals is missing stories of supply shipments and knowledge sharing. But I doubt it.

    As said whether restrictions are the best fit for any given nation remains to be seen as each nation will tolerate restriction to a greater or lesser extent and that’s where sociology and psychology need to be involved in the epidemiological work, alongside mathematics.

    I’m glad I’m not working on how to mange this. If the mortality rate is indeed 2% and we have no individual immunity or vaccine it will kill a great many people before the ‘herd’ becomes immune if the management policy is wrong.

    That said, the mortality rate may be way lower as if we’re lucky many more people around the world have had it and have defeated it fast without noticing. And covid-19 itself may die off or become less lethal; just another covid variant that causes a mild cold. Or a lab team will have a vaccine soon and the world will come together to test it and make it freely available.

  • Boris will take the credit for all the safety measures taken by families, companies and institutions to protect themselves and their workers/clients in the absence of any proper leadership. The economy and confidence in the economy not the health of the nation has always been and will always be the priority of the right wing the world over. He made all the sad noises while actually taking no real action. I am asthmatic myself and my daughter has immunity problems I'm not as doomladen as some about the future but hopefully we will all come through this as unscathed as possible.

  • @Manboobs, very well expressed arguments above. It's a complicated issue with many different opinions, clearly they can't all be correct.
    I did wonder if there was any connection between those writing the article and those advising the Government, it was such a perfect fit that I can't help but think that's the case.
    One can only hope that collectively we are taking the best approach to minimise unnecessary deaths due to this virus (whatever that phrase actually means).

  • @Wendoverman said:
    Boris will take the credit for all the safety measures taken by families, companies and institutions to protect themselves and their workers/clients in the absence of any proper leadership. The economy and confidence in the economy not the health of the nation has always been and will always be the priority of the right wing the world over. He made all the sad noises while actually taking no real action. I am asthmatic myself and my daughter has immunity problems I'm not as doomladen as some about the future but hopefully we will all come through this as unscathed as possible.

    I hope so too Wendoverman I really do. Whether we go up, compete the season or whatever doesn’t seem that important. That this time next year the world is in a position to be playing football again and looking back on 2020 as far less bad than we feared seems hugely important.

  • This is the article that worries me the most. The worst case scenario is the expected scenario.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/15/uk-coronavirus-crisis-to-last-until-spring-2021-and-could-see-79m-hospitalised

  • Some interesting articles to peruse over whilst working from home. Whilst the football is way down the list of importance, it would be good to still mull over what will happen, if anything to help keep my mind off future concerns for my families over 70's or those with current conditions!
    I was thinking about how we could finish this season and then head into next season, assuming clubs survive the next few months.
    Top 4 divisions all have 9-10 games left to play.
    It seems we might be able to get up and running again in July/August looking at the China curve and lift in restrictions they have.
    Assuming that is the case. Complete the current season in July/August. Give the players 3 weeks off in September. We normally play 11 league games and 2 league cup games in August/September.
    Reduce pre-season to two games at end of September and get straight into games from October.
    Cancel Football League Trophy - 3 match days back.
    Cancel League Cup - 2 match days back.
    For Premier League/Championship - cancel International Friendly Football in Nov - 2 match days back.
    Champions League / Europa League - straight knockout for one season. Would give 5 or 6 match days back. I think it would generate more interest in the competition as well.
    Extend league games until 15th May.
    Play-off semi-finals on 18th/19th May, one leg at neutral venue. Then straight to final on bank holiday weekend. Would only take one extra week.
    That then leave around 3 games for all 4 divisions to fit in mid week throughout the season.
    Euro 2020 moves to Euro 2021.

Sign In or Register to comment.