Should Football Carry On Without Testing In EFL

[Well b back 3,284]

Another player, this time at Grimsby has just tested positive with most of the squad going into a 2 week isolation period. Despite the statement about tomorrow they have called off their next 3 games. 
What does everyone think ? Is football acceptable ( at any level ) without testing ?. I guess not all people around these players are young fit athletes ?. With the FA considering football to be a limited contact sport with very little risk have they got it wrong ?

https://www.grimsby-townfc.co.uk/news/2020/september/club-statement/

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

No testing is understandable. Its too expensive.

If they are determined to play then so be it but they should quarantine at home between games and training. Nobody else should be at risk because of it.

[Well b back 3,284]

Hi Grandad

The further down the pyramid we go the more mixing there will be. Certainly once you get below the Conference these guys will have other jobs. When you go that bit further down they will be giving each other lifts ( Bartley Reds ). I guess even if you make them stay at home some wives probably still work and certainly kids go to school.  

[All the Germans 1,085]

I think it's all madness and over the top. The sooner we get back to normal life, the better.

[City fan 78]

Carry on like this and the season will be suspended like last season.

[TIL 1010 4,802]

No testing is madness unless you wish to hurry up the lockdown that is obviously on the way.

[paul moy 235]

I started a similar thread last week. My view is as I said  that we should look after ourselves and test our players every week to maintain a competitive advantage by avoiding having to potentially forfeit games and points by keeping our squad as COVID-free as possible.

Today it was confirmed that Leyton Orient have been ejected from the League Cup and have lost around 150K from that game against Spurs  that should have been played on Tuesday.  If they had tested their players well before the game this would probably not have happened.

 

[Greavsy 2,453]

10 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

No testing is understandable. Its too expensive.

Too expensive? seriously KG? 

I saw a figure of £5K to test a team, which yes is a lot of money, to you and I, but in comparison to even EFL players wages its comparatively small.  

I accept clubs lower down the pyramid would struggle to pay it, but not the big boys. And what price to reduce infections? surely thats more the relevant point? 

[Greavsy 2,453]

1 minute ago, paul moy said:

Today it was confirmed that Leyton Orient have been ejected from the League Cup and have lost around 150K from that game against Spurs  that should have been played on Tuesday.  If they had tested their players well before the game this would probably not have happened.

 

Or not tested at all, as this test was facilitated and paid for by Spurs I understand, they would have not known and proceeded with the game, totally unaware. 

My understanding is that testing is only mandatory for EPL clubs, and not the lower ones - which is ridiculous in my opinion.

[Greavsy 2,453]

4 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

No testing is madness unless you wish to hurry up the lockdown that is obviously on the way.

Lockdown will be during the schools 1/2 term is my guess. 

[paul moy 235]

1 minute ago, Greavsy said:

Or not tested at all, as this test was facilitated and paid for by Spurs I understand, they would have not known and proceeded with the game, totally unaware. 

My understanding is that testing is only mandatory for EPL clubs, and not the lower ones - which is ridiculous in my opinion.

Indeed, they could have not tested, but maybe Spurs would have refused to play, or if they had played the situation could have become very serious for the Spurs squad, families etc.

[Branston Pickle 3,706]

I went to an FA Cup game a few weeks ago, and people there were saying that clubs who can’t play because of positive tests would forfeit the game.  I guess along the lines of what happened to Orient.  

[Greavsy 2,453]

3 minutes ago, paul moy said:

Indeed, they could have not tested, but maybe Spurs would have refused to play, or if they had played the situation could have become very serious for the Spurs squad, families etc.

Im sure whoever played Orient the week before are concerned though! Potentially more serious for them financially than the EPL mega-salaried stars.

 Isn't it funny how even in a global pandemic football always revolves around money! 

 

[paul moy 235]

There is also the issue of long-COVID whereby sufferers can experience long-term debilitating after-effects for months. With our valuable squad testing is even more essential for this reason.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-54106272

Edited September 25, 2020 by paul moy

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

4 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Too expensive? seriously KG? 

I saw a figure of £5K to test a team, which yes is a lot of money, to you and I, but in comparison to even EFL players wages its comparatively small.  

I accept clubs lower down the pyramid would struggle to pay it, but not the big boys. And what price to reduce infections? surely thats more the relevant point? 

I was looking beyond us Greavsy. There are 72 EFL clubs. How many are going to be able to afford the testing?

The figures released by some clubs is £30K a week for testing not £5K as I understand they test twice a week. Thats a million for a season. And no prospect of supporters returning.

I really cannot see the season continuing properly. It may muddle along in some form but its just so false.

 

[Greavsy 2,453]

3 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I was looking beyond us Greavsy. There are 72 EFL clubs. How many are going to be able to afford the testing?

The figures released by some clubs is £30K a week for testing not £5K as I understand they test twice a week. Thats a million for a season. And no prospect of supporters returning.

I really cannot see the season continuing properly. It may muddle along in some form but its just so false.

 

Evening KG - apologies if my post sounded like a personal dig - wasnt my intention! i come in peace!

I was looking beyond us too - Whilst most clubs would prefer not to be in the position of  having to pay it, even at £1m a season for the EPL teams thats still small. 

Totally accept the further down the pyramid you go the bigger impact it would have. 

Maybe as Klopp suggested today, the bigger clubs helped out the smaller clubs. Cant see it happening. 

 

[FenwayFrank 2,469]

25 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I went to an FA Cup game a few weeks ago, and people there were saying that clubs who can’t play because of positive tests would forfeit the game

I think this has already happened 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,865]

League One and Two clubs are to struggling to survive as it is, without spending several hundreds of thousands of pounds over the course of the season for covid testing. 

Also, if the rules state that entire squads have to isolate for 14 days if one player tests positive, which is a daft rule really because the others have all tested negative (and on top of that, no other country is implementing such a rule), then there's no way the season will finish. The only way to complete the season with that rule in place is to not test unless a player shows symptoms, and play the 'ignorance is bliss' card, as all positive cases in the world of football recently have been asymptomatic. That's very dangerous of course from a moral and social point of view, but from the clubs' point of view, it's the only way to complete the season and/or survive.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,865]

39 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I went to an FA Cup game a few weeks ago, and people there were saying that clubs who can’t play because of positive tests would forfeit the game.  I guess along the lines of what happened to Orient.  

As I said in another thread yesterday, punishing clubs for positive tests will just mean that clubs won't test.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

36 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Evening KG - apologies if my post sounded like a personal dig - wasnt my intention! i come in peace!

I was looking beyond us too - Whilst most clubs would prefer not to be in the position of  having to pay it, even at £1m a season for the EPL teams thats still small. 

Totally accept the further down the pyramid you go the bigger impact it would have. 

Maybe as Klopp suggested today, the bigger clubs helped out the smaller clubs. Cant see it happening. 

 

No apology needed. I knew what you meant. 

Its obscene when the EPL clubs are still in talks about buying £75M players from Spain but aren't willing to club together and pay for EFL testing.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

2 hours ago, All the Germans said:

I think it's all madness and over the top. The sooner we get back to normal life, the better.

Its not madness. 

Its to stop people getting themselves in a serious condition only to find there are no ICU beds or ventilators available.

Its not a problem for you until your mate or uncle is one of those people. Norfolk has been very lucky so far, I have a friend in Manchester who has lost three relatives, a close friend and a work colleague, with one other friend being released from hospital only to later have a stroke (still a lot of research being done on that, young people aren't dying but they are having strokes after recovering). 

I hope that it never feels that real for you.

Edited September 25, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

2 hours ago, Greavsy said:

Too expensive? seriously KG? 

I saw a figure of £5K to test a team, which yes is a lot of money, to you and I, but in comparison to even EFL players wages its comparatively small.  

I accept clubs lower down the pyramid would struggle to pay it, but not the big boys. And what price to reduce infections? surely thats more the relevant point? 

It was two tests a week though wasn't it.

2 tests a week is £10k, over 42 weeks that's £420k.

Macclesfield just went under with debts of £500k. 

Edited September 25, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[hogesar 9,769]

47 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Its not madness. 

Its to stop people getting themselves in a serious condition only to find there are no ICU beds or ventilators available.

Its not a problem for you until your mate or uncle is one of those people. Norfolk has been very lucky so far, I have a friend in Manchester who has lost three relatives, a close friend and a work colleague, with one other friend being released from hospital only to later have a stroke (still a lot of research being done on that, young people aren't dying but they are having strokes after recovering). 

I hope that it never feels that real for you.

Good post. Its really easy, particularly for those of us who are young and (relatively) fit to have a selfish outlook on this and of course, we see in the news there are a lot of selfish people in this country. Condolences to your friend.

[Well b back 3,284]

Don’t know if any of you heard Parry on radio 5 Live earlier. He was saying that many a club will be struggling by Christmas, many more will be out of business by March. Everything is unfortunate of course and any single death is worse than what might happen to a football club, but it looks like the clubs like ours that are run well will get totally shafted. He was saying wages in the Championship ( before Covid ) were 107% of turnover so as the EPL are not forthcoming, the EFL will have to give out loans ( he estimated £245million assuming crowds can come back in March ) and as most clubs will never be able to repay them ( or won’t want to repay them ) guess what he is going to use as garuntor against loans ? Yep the future TV money. So he said that would mean TV revenue distributions will be reduced to all clubs so the loans can be repaid. 
And back to Covid tests - ain’t going to happen, so consequently my best guess is by November there will be no football ( grassroots or professional ) except for the EPL and Championship which of course would be the main games that people would watch and of course will keep the fat cats counting up the pennies that they are earning at the expense of this pandemic.

WHY CANT EACH EPL ( and maybe the big Championship earners ) SPONSOR TESTS FOR SAY 4 LEAGUE 1 / 2 AND CONFERENCE PLAYERS ?. Let’s face it some players could buy out a league 2 or conference side with a weeks wages.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

23 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Don’t know if any of you heard Parry on radio 5 Live earlier. He was saying that many a club will be struggling by Christmas, many more will be out of business by March. Everything is unfortunate of course and any single death is worse than what might happen to a football club, but it looks like the clubs like ours that are run well will get totally shafted. He was saying wages in the Championship ( before Covid ) were 107% of turnover so as the EPL are not forthcoming, the EFL will have to give out loans ( he estimated £245million assuming crowds can come back in March ) and as most clubs will never be able to repay them ( or won’t want to repay them ) guess what he is going to use as garuntor against loans ? Yep the future TV money. So he said that would mean TV revenue distributions will be reduced to all clubs so the loans can be repaid. 
And back to Covid tests - ain’t going to happen, so consequently my best guess is by November there will be no football ( grassroots or professional ) except for the EPL and Championship which of course would be the main games that people would watch and of course will keep the fat cats counting up the pennies that they are earning at the expense of this pandemic.

WHY CANT EACH EPL ( and maybe the big Championship earners ) SPONSOR TESTS FOR SAY 4 LEAGUE 1 / 2 AND CONFERENCE PLAYERS ?. Let’s face it some players could buy out a league 2 or conference side with a weeks wages.

Surely each loan to a club would be secured against that clubs TV revenues.

If they loaned £1m for Ipswich, but we didn't take a loan, then that £2m would be secured against Ipswich's future revenues?

[Capt. Pants 4,298]

Getting tested doesn't stop you getting C-19. It's quite surprising how many footballers are actually getting infected bearing in mind the sport and training is outdoors. I agree the further down the ladder you go possibly the greater the risk if facilities and systems aren't as good, but it sounds as football clubs are getting very lax already.

I can see the season being brought to a halt before Christmas.

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

12 hours ago, All the Germans said:

I think it's all madness and over the top. The sooner we get back to normal life, the better.

Yes. Delaying the inevitable as this is going nowhere and sooner or later we will all realise we have to learn to live with this. Lockdown may have saved some lives but at what expense? My father in law now has terminal cancer after a diagnosis period that lasted throughout lockdown and well after, there will be 10s of thousands of people in the same boat. Reports  are that numbers being seen on the top 8 killers in this country are down 173,000 on this time last year. Mental health and suicide numbers will inevitably rise as job losses hit. The response to this has destroyed the economy and merely saved certain people’s lives at the expense of others. There is a lot of death and suffering to come but they won’t be dying of covid

Edited September 26, 2020 by Teemu’s right foot

[Teemu’s right foot 53]

As for football I can’t see any logic behind not allowing fans to attend matches, certainly at lower league level where attendances are below 5.000 people. These clubs are in danger now of going out of business and need that income. There were hundreds of thousands gathering like sardines in a can for various protests every week for over a month all over the country and no spike in cases was seen

[kick it off 1,956]

13 hours ago, Greavsy said:

Too expensive? seriously KG? 

I saw a figure of £5K to test a team, which yes is a lot of money, to you and I, but in comparison to even EFL players wages its comparatively small.  

I accept clubs lower down the pyramid would struggle to pay it, but not the big boys. And what price to reduce infections? surely thats more the relevant point? 

Think Bethnal quoted a figure of 30k per week, and he's normally right about stuff!

[Well b back 3,284]

8 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

Getting tested doesn't stop you getting C-19. It's quite surprising how many footballers are actually getting infected bearing in mind the sport and training is outdoors. I agree the further down the ladder you go possibly the greater the risk if facilities and systems aren't as good, but it sounds as football clubs are getting very lax already.

I can see the season being brought to a halt before Christmas.

But testing does stop others getting ( as does isolation ) but the FA claim football is a limited contact sport and therefore other players should not be isolating. They are punishing clubs ( Orient and Bartley Reds for starters ) for doing the right thing. I think the case of Bartley Reds will stop all football below the Championship if the FA carry out their threat of a £400 fine and points deduction.