• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Season suspended again?

3 weeks is about the time that 70+% immunity will be in force from the vaccine. The difference between now and last August is the vaccine - which we will keep giving until everyone has it.

The virus is never going to go away, but we will have to learn to live with it, like chicken pox, measles, flu etc. It will kill some people every year, as does flu. But if it's damage can be limited to the damage flu does, we can get back to normal.
Re the vaccine, a small thing but you can not have the vaccine if you have tested positive in the last 28 days.
My 86 year old mum has covid but is , fingers crossed, ok now. I took a call on Saturday to book her vaccination for next Sunday and the first thing I was asked was “ has she had a positive test in the last 28 days”

another point is that it is believed that after you are vaccinated you can still be a spreader for another 2 weeks, so this needs to be fractured in to timelines
 
Assuming you're right, then 40% could still be infectious.
You think the govt are going to allow 40% to infect each other?
That's a bit like saying we'll only have just under half the deaths we're getting now.

Also people are forgetting, a lot of people won't accept the jab, more younger people are being effected by this second strain, we've seen that people can get this twice, what's to say they can't get it a 3rd time and does this jab protect them from that. The second jabs won't have got round to everyong by the end of March and (a hate to say this) what's to say we won't see a new strain. I'd love to put a possitive spin on all this but, the above the scientists don't know right now. It would be a huge gamble for the Government to relax anything right now until they get answers. They've made too many mistakes along the way which I can't see them making again.
 
Re the vaccine, a small thing but you can not have the vaccine if you have tested positive in the last 28 days.
My 86 year old mum has covid but is , fingers crossed, ok now. I took a call on Saturday to book her vaccination for next Sunday and the first thing I was asked was “ has she had a positive test in the last 28 days”

another point is that it is believed that after you are vaccinated you can still be a spreader for another 2 weeks, so this needs to be fractured in to timelines

I certainly wasn't aware of that.

So many if and buts right now.
 
Assuming you're right, then 40% could still be infectious.
You think the govt are going to allow 40% to infect each other?
That's a bit like saying we'll only have just under half the deaths we're getting now.
No. I’d expect a lot of the measures to still be in place, but it will be relaxed. 40% will still be able to get it, but will have less folk they can catch it from.
 
Assuming you're right, then 40% could still be infectious.
You think the govt are going to allow 40% to infect each other?
That's a bit like saying we'll only have just under half the deaths we're getting now.

I don't think this point can be answered properly without getting into the politics of it and that isn't where we want to go... but in amongst the 40% will be all the kids who are as infectious as can be, but who don't appear to be dying or even getting that ill.

I don't know what the demographics of the country are, but if you take out all the vulnerable i.e. the elderly, those with underlying conditions, the doctors, NHS workers and teachers, then you're left with the section of the population that can deal with the virus as if it were no more than a heavy cold.

If you eradicate from the equation most of the ones that need hospitalisation or who will die, then it is much more manageable. Also, don't forget, that this virus is attacking the ones most vulnerable and if they have sadly died, they aren't going to get it again. All the people who have had it and survived have some immunity so won't get it again - at least for a few months (odd exceptions aside).

The actual death percentage in the youngsters group is pretty tiny. We can't keep everyone locked down for ever; sooner or later we have to live with the dangers of the virus and we hope our natural defences plus the virus inevitable mutations into weaker strains are enough to enable life to get back to normal as far as we can, and - to get a bit back on topic - to get fans into football stadiums.
 
I don't think this point can be answered properly without getting into the politics of it and that isn't where we want to go... but in amongst the 40% will be all the kids who are as infectious as can be, but who don't appear to be dying or even getting that ill.

I don't know what the demographics of the country are, but if you take out all the vulnerable i.e. the elderly, those with underlying conditions, the doctors, NHS workers and teachers, then you're left with the section of the population that can deal with the virus as if it were no more than a heavy cold.

If you eradicate from the equation most of the ones that need hospitalisation or who will die, then it is much more manageable. Also, don't forget, that this virus is attacking the ones most vulnerable and if they have sadly died, they aren't going to get it again. All the people who have had it and survived have some immunity so won't get it again - at least for a few months (odd exceptions aside).

The actual death percentage in the youngsters group is pretty tiny. We can't keep everyone locked down for ever; sooner or later we have to live with the dangers of the virus and we hope our natural defences plus the virus inevitable mutations into weaker strains are enough to enable life to get back to normal as far as we can, and - to get a bit back on topic - to get fans into football stadiums.

Sorry, I don't get your logic behind that. Are you suggesting that teachers, NHS workers and doctors are more vulnerable? I could have miss read it, but that's how I read it.

As for the rest of the population just getting a cold, it really isn't that way with this new strain, more and more young people are dying from this second strain than the first.
 
And that is where the argument falls down, sadly.
Case numbers will always dictate the next govt move.
More testing means more numbers, of course, but how can the govt allow spectators back into grounds when numbers are still high?
It would be like saying all restrictions now have been for nothing.
As said above, testing is good, but the other side of that coin is there will be more positives.

My thoughts fall on the side of a high percentage of cases wont become seriously ill. If you then vaccinate the vulnerable etc then the people that can have a cough feel a bit like dog muck then back to work shouldn't be constantly monitored for cases. I see that as a bit like monitoring cases of any number of the respiratory viruses thay we haven't shut down for. But of course that is ONLY at the point of vaccination for those susceptible to serious illness and in worst cases death from covid. The key factor can then shift from cases, into a hospitalisation based monitoring.

Im not condoning a hurried rush back or anything, just that once likelihood of serious illness or death is limited to a very very small number surely there will be a quick withdrawal of the restrictions and testing otherwise again we will well and truly be stuck in what some refer to as a 'casedemic'. This virus will be with us on earth for the rest of time, we just need to protect the people that need protecting before we welcome it on board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fbm
Interesting view from the EFL. “The game has shown it can play BCD safely” while it only started testing twice a week this week... Suspect the sentence before that may have more to do with it.
Agreed!
Can't really support the idea the game is 'safe' BCD.
Scottish League after the Championship is suspended; EFL and an FA Cup tie as well as PL games have been postponed.
When you've got brain-dead footballers filming themselves at prohibited NYE parties and posting it online, then it's more a lottery than 'safe'.
The real question is how many clubs have reported NO Covid cases?
I'm willing to bet the number is diminishing by the day.
 
If footballers keep breaking the rules and fans turning up at grounds, football could be in the last chance saloon. It doesn't seem fair everyone else is locked down, but mentally I think it brings alot of benefit and relief to people. Dont think they will suspend it yet but tgd goverment might pull the plug if they dint get their house in order
 
Sorry, I don't get your logic behind that. Are you suggesting that teachers, NHS workers and doctors are more vulnerable? I could have miss read it, but that's how I read it.

As for the rest of the population just getting a cold, it really isn't that way with this new strain, more and more young people are dying from this second strain than the first.

The more vulnerable are the elderly, the people with underlying conditions, doctors, NHS workers and teachers. The latter 3 categories are I would say vulnerable for different reasons and perhaps in a different way. But if all those groups get vaccinated first then that's the people most likely to catch it and the people most likely to die from it protected.
 
The more vulnerable are the elderly, the people with underlying conditions, doctors, NHS workers and teachers. The latter 3 categories are I would say vulnerable for different reasons and perhaps in a different way. But if all those groups get vaccinated first then that's the people most likely to catch it and the people most likely to die from it protected.
Not sure about the highlighted point.
Those catching it are all age ranges; some affected more than others.
The key is how quickly can the majority get vaccinated?
Not before the end of the regular season is my guess, and therefore fans being allowed back is not promising.
 
Not sure about the highlighted point.
Those catching it are all age ranges; some affected more than others.
The key is how quickly can the majority get vaccinated?
Not before the end of the regular season is my guess, and therefore fans being allowed back is not promising.

My meaning is that doctors and NHS workers are in with the people who have it, all day, every day, up close and personal. Yes, they have PPE, but one of the reasons the hospitals are
struggling so much is because so many staff are absent having tested positive and are either ill or in isolation.
 
Last edited:
I think the only reason that football is continuing is because it's literally the only thing left in many peoples lives at the moment.

I beleive a concious decision has been made that while it is clearly not possible for footballers to be protected entirely against Covid, they are quite clearly not in the bracket of vulnerable and therefore very very unlikley to suffer with it.

The benefits of the continuation of football on peoples mental health far outweighs the miniscual risk to players and staff. That's how I beleive they see it, whether that's correct or even a valid point remains uncertain.
 
I think the only reason that football is continuing is because it's literally the only thing left in many peoples lives at the moment.

I beleive a concious decision has been made that while it is clearly not possible for footballers to be protected entirely against Covid, they are quite clearly not in the bracket of vulnerable and therefore very very unlikley to suffer with it.

The benefits of the continuation of football on peoples mental health far outweighs the miniscual risk to players and staff. That's how I beleive they see it, whether that's correct or even a valid point remains uncertain.

There is only one reason football is continuing, and that is the thing that dictates every facet of it, and has done since 1992. Money.
 
One thing that will help football to continue is if all clubs insist that celebrating a goal should NOT involve hugging or any other physical contact. Non football fans are continually complaining about this as they see it constantly on TV and rightly comment that it is against social distancing rules. This is the sort of thing that could change the mind of Government ministers and lead to a halt of elite football. The clubs really need to address this.
 
Marking a player at a corner or in fact anywhere on the pitch would be against social distancing rules if that were the case
 
Back
Top