Football and Covid
- Thread starter jocklatic
- Start date
Do the clubs do background checks on people who buy tickets in the kids sections?
If this was expanding checks already in place you could understand it, but a whole new system being put in place to see if someone has an experimental cold jab is a little extreme.
This is a 100% slippery slope for Society in general. These "checks" are being put in place as people are being considered as a danger to others. When you start considering all the ways someone could be a danger to someone else you start to see the problem.
One interesting piece of the law is liability, if clubs are putting in place rules about covid it causes potential issues for "reasonable expectation". Right now if you catch covid somewhere its bad luck, if a business is providing a reasonable expectation you cannot catch it inside the grounds, you do, and you can prove it that wouldn't be a good place to be.
If this was expanding checks already in place you could understand it, but a whole new system being put in place to see if someone has an experimental cold jab is a little extreme.
This is a 100% slippery slope for Society in general. These "checks" are being put in place as people are being considered as a danger to others. When you start considering all the ways someone could be a danger to someone else you start to see the problem.
One interesting piece of the law is liability, if clubs are putting in place rules about covid it causes potential issues for "reasonable expectation". Right now if you catch covid somewhere its bad luck, if a business is providing a reasonable expectation you cannot catch it inside the grounds, you do, and you can prove it that wouldn't be a good place to be.
Last edited:
The_Pon
Vital Reserves Team
I don't just support expectations from venues that people present will be double jabbed, but I expect it and wouldn't go somewhere without that rule. If I caught Covid due to someone cheating those rules, I'd sue them into eternal poverty. I have zero sympathy for anti vaxxers, and I'd actually take a lot of joy in ruining their lives: it's entirely justified since they selfishly risk other people's lives.
What would you do if someone who had both vaccines gave you the virus? What about someone who is medically justified in not having the jabs?
Suing a person due to a health decision they made would be extremely difficult. The problem you'd have would be intent, you aren't purchasing anything from a person you randomly meet at the game and therefore do not enter a contract with them and they have very little duty of care toward you (in the eyes of the law). Would you sue someone who gave you an STD? How about someone who gave an elderly relative the flu?
My point was mainly clubs are taking on responsibility for people's health which potentially leaves them legally open (and not just for covid related issues).
ExiledViking
Vital Squad Member
The reaction to COVID passports from the Anti-Vax, Anti-Government and Tin Foil Hat brigades is embarrassing, yet predictable.
The government are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
If COVID passports are the way for the time being, then so be it...
The government are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
If COVID passports are the way for the time being, then so be it...
Kenny Morris
Vital Squad Member
Not really, as we were in lockdown in the flu season and you don't really hear normally anyway unless its someone you knew.
Perhaps if you knew someone who had suffered from Covid or died as a result then you wouldn't be quite so flippant
Mighty Bongsmon
Vital Squad Member
It's anyone's right to not have the covid vaccine for whatever reason they choose & it's not my place to criticise them although if they asked I'd tell them why I believe having it is the right thing to do
That said it is also any venue's right to put whatever measures in place that they see fit to ensure the safety of it's customers and staff during the biggest pandemic since the end of WWI & to try and maximise it's income at the same time
If those who are choosing not to have the vaccine don't like those measures then, for me, they have no grounds to complain - they've made their choice so have to live with the consequences
That said it is also any venue's right to put whatever measures in place that they see fit to ensure the safety of it's customers and staff during the biggest pandemic since the end of WWI & to try and maximise it's income at the same time
If those who are choosing not to have the vaccine don't like those measures then, for me, they have no grounds to complain - they've made their choice so have to live with the consequences
hindleymonwafc
Vital Champions League
It's the me me me society at its worst. Selfish nobody tells me what to do bar stewards.
TRUE BELIEVER
Vital Football Hero
This sort of validates my earlier comments that the insurance companies will end up having more of a say in the matter. I believe it will be them that dictate policy on this by raising the premiums of venues and businesses that fail to put the policy of only allowing those fully vaccinated into premises.
They did this in the past with the smoking ban and have had great influence on the current Health and safety laws that are in place within the construction industry. It was at their instigation that the H & S paperwork increased in recent years, method statements, COSHH sheets and risk assessments are the way that the insurance companies apportion blame when an incident occurs. The cost to the industry was huge and many people objected, however it is now accepted as the norm and I am convinced that the same will be said of Covid passports in the months to come.
The_Pon
Vital Reserves Team
If someone who had both vaccines gave me the virus, I'd take it on the chin as bad luck; I couldn't blame them since they've legitimately taken all possible measures to prevent that and that's all that can be expected of anyone. It's orders of magnitude less likely that someone double vaxxed would infect someone else though.
Clearly if someone has a legit medical condition that prevents them from being vaccinated, it's a different scenario. Can't blame people for that, though it begs the question why they'd want to be in a football stadium with thousands of others when they have a medical condition that means they're much more vulnerable to a potentially fatal disease.
As for the technicality, I wouldn't be suing someone over a health decision. I'd be suing them for lying and/or falsifying documents to get into an event where they shouldn't be allowed to be.
No-one can be forced to be vaccinated, but if they make the choice not to be, they must accept the consequences; we seem to now live in a world where people bang on about rights constantly but refuse to accept any responsibility. The two go hand in hand: if someone doesn't want to be vaccinated, I accept that they have that right, but they must also take responsibility, and in this case, that means not being allowed to attend events where their very presence there represents a heightened risk to thousands of other people's health. Anything else is just selfish and irresponsible.
AbramLatic1
Vital Reserves Team
More player-related than fans, but noticed that there's been a few friendlies called off in last few days, I can see next weekend a small number of games getting postponed late on due to cases hitting clubs
Decided not to go Sunderland simply because I'm not 100% ready to be in a hugely populated small space with zero social distancing and masks. Was a tough call to make as I'd earmarked this game ages ago having not been to the Stadium of Light in many years, but I figured I've escaped Covid so far by being careful and I don't want to get pinged and miss the Rotherham game. For those going, stay safe.
As opposed to away games, I have far less worries going to the DW. There's plenty of space in the ground for all home fans to make their own decision on how they want to watch the game.
As opposed to away games, I have far less worries going to the DW. There's plenty of space in the ground for all home fans to make their own decision on how they want to watch the game.
Proud Latic
Vital Reserves Team
If you think such a measure would be temporary then, with all due respect, you're very naive.
Proud Latic
Vital Reserves Team
Nobody can give you a disease that they don't have. Asymptomatic spread is exceedingly rare. If somebody is ill, the last thing they're going to be doing is wandering around in public.
You are effectively calling for people to be excluded from society because they don't want to inject an experimental vaccine into their body. Do you believe in bodily autonomy? Since the vaccine doesn't prevent one getting the virus or transmitting it, a vaccine passport is utterly pointless. Also, where do you think it will end? Do you really believe that this won't be expanded?
moonay
Vital Football Legend
If asymptomatic spread is "exceedingly rare", then there must have been a lot of ill people wandering about to have infected so many others.
Experimental? Hasn't it been cleared for use?
Proud Latic
Vital Reserves Team
Fauci made it clear that asymptomatic spread is very rare, as have many prominent virologists.
It has emergency use authorisation. It is still in clinical trials until 2023.
As always its follow the money. Insurance companies and big pharma working together never goes well! In the USA right now I pay one price myself or a price of around double if I let my insurance company handle it, you'd think the insurance company would get a bulk discount.
I'd be more happy to have a Covid passport, if it goes to the full draconian extent of the passport including any infectious disease (TB, Aids etc.), reason being its then an actual process vs over reaction to a virus which in one form or another has been around since before man existed.
The extension would then be people who are a danger to others, so any convictions would go into your passport and companies can be very selective about who goes in. Then of course you have a way for every company to check your credit score (which is actually a really good indicator) and before you know it we are in a "children of men" / "V for vendetta" type world which is split hugely between the haves and have nots.
moonay
Vital Football Legend
Serious question then ........ how have so many people been infected? If ill people haven't been wandering about, and have stayed home, it must surely have spread by those not feeling/displaying symptoms ........ unless I suppose, there's a period where it's spreadable before someone feels sufficiently poorly so as not to go out.
Fair enough re the emergency use.
Proud Latic
Vital Reserves Team
I'm certainly no expert in virology, but I imagine that it's spread from people with a sufficiently high enough viral load, meaning that they will have some symptoms (but not severe ones). I've known people that claim to have had COVID that have some mild symptoms, so I imagine that they've spread it to others in continuing with their business and not isolating.
As Chris Whitty said last year, the vast majority of people are not at risk from this virus. It is very infectious but doesn't pose a risk to the young and healthy - it appears that the elderly, the obese, and those with severe co-morbidities are most at risk. It is important to protect the elderly and the vulnerable, but lockdowns are not the way to do this in my view.
