So, how do we access the EPL's Risk Assessment of resuming games?

[Pugin 601]

I ask the question because the most inadequate and downright dangerous risk assessments are conducted when the authors already know the desired conclusion - in this case the EPL wants the conclusion to be that adequate mitigation will reduce the Risk to a manageable and acceptable level.

With good reason there is a paucity of information available as to how the virus is transmitted, how prevalent it is, why those of BAME background appear more susceptible, how near we are to an effective vaccine, what pre-match testing actually proves, whether extreme exercise promotes degree of damage, long term effects etc. etc. etc. 

In the circumstances, at Monday's EPL meeting it is the risk assessment which should be scrutinised and challenged most keenly, as I am sure that it will be the EPL's achilles heel. 

(The same question arose when all seater stadiums were introduced. I took the time to read all the legislation and the introduction of all seating decreed that every sports venue shall conduct its own risk assessment and base their actions on that. Did these ever see the light of day? No chance!)

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I think the top teams owners risk assessment is based around qualifying for the CL. They are risking everything on a tournament that may not even happen.

If other clubs, all the players and officials are prepared to be bullied by pure speculation then they need to think of the wider consequences.

There is no risk assessment that would ever say that a resumption of football is OK. All the risks are not acceptable. And the hypocrisy is that footballers have argued they wanted to be treated the same as any other worker/employee except when it suits to be treated differently.