Coronavirus | Page 47 | Vital Football

Coronavirus

I have to say I fear for the EFL clubs if they are bringing players off furlough and offering new contracts in anticipation of the league starting on September 12th and the infection rate of Covid has hit 800 + today from 500 + a week ago.

I desperately hope I am wrong but fear the current rise in cases might end up causing problems for the start of the season.
 
Ban on different households meeting indoors reintroduced in Greater Manchester, parts of Lancashire and West Yorkshire from midnight.

Apparently teenagers breaking social distancing rules, getting infected ( dont suffer much with it, whatevs) then spreading it amongst more vulnerable family members.

Obey the f***ing rules, they're there for a reason, you selfish ignorant t**ts.
 
bbh 11 said:
I have to say I fear for the EFL clubs if they are bringing players off furlough and offering new contracts in anticipation of the league starting on September 12th and the infection rate of Covid has hit 800 + today from 500 + a week ago.

I desperately hope I am wrong but fear the current rise in cases might end up causing problems for the start of the season.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. and evening if the leagues do start the likelihood of allowing any spectators at all is looking more distant than it was even a week ago.
 
Chesterimp said:
Ban on different households meeting indoors reintroduced in Greater Manchester, parts of Lancashire and West Yorkshire from midnight.

Apparently teenagers breaking social distancing rules, getting infected ( dont suffer much with it, whatevs) then spreading it amongst more vulnerable family members.

Obey the f***ing rules, they're there for a reason, you selfish ignorant t**ts.
Click to expand...

This is where the plans being put in place by universities seem quite absurd to me.

The notion that 10,000 (say) - mostly 18-year-old - students away from home for the first time in their lives are going to obey social distancing regulations does not rank high in the probability stakes for me.
 
Chesterimp said:
Ban on different households meeting indoors reintroduced in Greater Manchester, parts of Lancashire and West Yorkshire from midnight.

Apparently teenagers breaking social distancing rules, getting infected ( dont suffer much with it, whatevs) then spreading it amongst more vulnerable family members.

Obey the f***ing rules, they're there for a reason, you selfish ignorant t**ts.
Click to expand...

Yes, the new rules in Manchester are impacting us in terms of plans to visit (or vice versa) our granddaughters who live up there

Also, re my post above re the pub in Stone - there's obviously been a big backlash from the local population. And on the estate and around where we live, there are groups of teens wandering around together who are obviously not siblings!!
 
I think it's fairly clear then that
1) The lockdown is needed as common sense isn't prevailing
2) The lockdown worked, since we have released it numbers have climbed again
 
Being very close to the border with GM , one mile infact , i had a quick look at the places involved . Hancock explained that its "restrictions on family gatherings inside the home and in the garden" Gatherings in pubs etc etc wernt mentioned at all . As these area mentioned GM, East Lancs and West Yorks have large Muslim populations it seems ironic that is is the eve of"Eid al Ahda" , being a festival would entail large family gatherings .

Pubs , resturants cafes etc arn't affected although Johnson is giving one of his "talks" later . I'll be in my garden in Wales .
 
Last edited:
NottyImp said:
One way to think about this is a thought experiment.

What if tomorrow we went back to our way of life exactly as it was on, say, 01.03.2020? What would happen, do you think?
Click to expand...

Little difference in CV fatality rates,a much improved economy and benefit to living standards,and a chance for the NHS to work through the backlog of operations cancelled during lockdown.
 
57harry said:
Little difference in CV fatality rates,a much improved economy and benefit to living standards,and a chance for the NHS to work through the backlog of operations cancelled during lockdown.
Click to expand...

I think that's highly doubtful. We're not close to herd immunity and there is no vaccine. We also don't seem to have particularly high infection rates - i.e. the number of people who have actually had the virus. Perhaps 20%? Although it's difficult to get precise figures.

Therefore, there would be a surge in infections and we would likely end up somewhere close to where we were during the first wave. The virus hasn't changed just because your wishful thinking wants it to have done.

A lot of vulnerable people would probably die, including, potentially many of those in hospital for treatments, especially older folks and those with underlying health conditions.
 
Last edited:
Sincilbanks said:
I think it's fairly clear then that
1) The lockdown is needed as common sense isn't prevailing
2) The lockdown worked, since we have released it numbers have climbed again
Click to expand...

Lockdowns are the last thing that are needed in this situation and do not work in terms of the overall health and well-being of society, as attested by the 21,000 extra deaths estimated as a result of the national lockdown instituted in March:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...0-extra-deaths-reduced-access-healthcare.html

I'd also suggest moving your focus away from 'numbers' (i.e. cases) ASAP and instead track hospitalisations and fatalities - the two things that initiated the original lockdown and which surely for any sensible government or participant in the Covid debate, should be the key indicators on whether the UK (or anywhere else) is facing any kind of emergency, second wave or 'spike'.

Latest figures on CV hospitalisations in England:

Capture.JPG

And UK CV deaths:

Capture 2.JPG
Some more analysis on 'The Second Wave' is here:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...-coronavirus-wave-no-sign-one-yet-scientists/

I'd agree 'common sense' is not prevailing, but not for the same reasons that you do.
 
NottyImp said:
One way to think about this is a thought experiment.

What if tomorrow we went back to our way of life exactly as it was on, say, 01.03.2020? What would happen, do you think?
Click to expand...


What would happen is lots of people would die very quickly but the virus would burn itself out after a few million deaths say in 18 months to two years time. By all this lockdown and mitigation measure we are just elongating the process and buying time to find a vaccine.

The World has put all its eggs into the vaccine basket however if no successful vaccine is found ultimately there will probably be more deaths. Those that would have got it will eventually get it anyway but more people will pass into the vulnerable category as time goes on so they will get it and the virus and it will never go away. Then there will be the economic fallout the rich countries will be broke and third world aid will dry up causing even more deaths. Individuals will have no jobs and so charitable donations will tumble even more so than they have now. I see Cancer Research are saying that their donations have plummeted and it will start effecting research soon.

Not saying the lockdown/vaccine route is wrong just that if there is still no vaccine in 2 or 3 years time which is still a possibility then it will likely be a whole lot worse than had the virus just run its course.

We have chosen this path and we have to stick to it and just hope there is vaccine by this time next year otherwise it's going to get a lot worse than it is now.
 
Sincilbanks said:
The US says "Hi, our CV fatality rates are climbing steadily..."
Click to expand...

That is true for a few states-but that is the first wave for those States. The numerous states that had their peak back in April eg. New York have shown no sign of a second wave
 
57harry said:
That is true for a few states-but that is the first wave for those States. The numerous states that had their peak back in April eg. New York have shown no sign of a second wave
Click to expand...

Perhaps because most people are still socially distancing both in their personal and private lives? Working from home and generally avoiding public transport? Not going to the cinema/gigs/theatre? Avoiding large gatherings of all kinds? Using masks and PPE when needed?

It's not rocket-science to work this out.
 
Here's what happened when people *didn't* do that, as described by Stokeimp:

"A pub in Stone, the local market town down the road from us, was pictured earlier in the week with their beer garden rammed with people a week last Saturday night. Now 10 people who were there have tested positive for coronavirus, and a testing station has been set up in the town, at which there are massive queues - aiming to test people who were there, who they've been in contact with, and who was elsewhere in town over that weekend. The demographic appears to be largely late teens / early twenties."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.