no_loyalty
Well-Known Member
Some clubs in the National league and below are going to be fucked now.
I can’t find one article that supports this
Sad but probably true.Thats not how it works. It could be less safe at pubs and they still stay open. It’s about economic cost as well. 92 football clubs employ fewer people than the entire hospitality industry. Close pubs and you have to fund billions in wages for furlough.
It’s not a threshold individual activities have too meet, it’s a total risk we can have as a society and deciding which activities to allow while staying within that risk budget. As much as we hate it, football is pretty low down in terms of economic importance so will be one of the first things to go so that other things can stay open.
I think you'll see just 3 divisions after this. Domino effect will now take hold
What evidence is there that says that it is safer to be in a pub in Accrington, Rochdale and Oldham than it is to be at a socially distanced football match?
The evidence from the Liverpool vs Ath Madrid and Cheltenham events is not appropriate here as these won't be rammed paccked.
It is likely to be less risky at an Oldham if they are only letting 1000 people in that it will be in a town centre pub at 9.30pm on ma Saturday.
No conferences or exhibitions my heart has never bled so muchSome might say this has been a master stroke by Sisu to starve Wasps another season with no rental income from us with the inevitable lack of supporters in stadiums this season.
Plenty of articles for you to read now.
I get the argument in allowing some things that would appear a greater risk than football crowds to remain open instead. I'm not agreeing with that stance. If it were me and this was brought up I'd be inclined to shut the pubs rather than let fans in the football.
But has been pointed out these decisions aren't really being made on transmission etc, they're being made largely on economic grounds. Pubs etc employ far more people and generate far more revenue than football matches do. So they'll strive to keep them open longer. Plus there's a popularity issue - not allowing fans into stadiums is unpopular, not letting people go to the pub is even more so.
What evidence is there that says that it is safer to be in a pub in Accrington, Rochdale and Oldham than it is to be at a socially distanced football match?
The evidence from the Liverpool vs Ath Madrid and Cheltenham events is not appropriate here as these won't be rammed paccked.
It is likely to be less risky at an Oldham if they are only letting 1000 people in that it will be in a town centre pub at 9.30pm on ma Saturday.
Thank fuck for Championship TV money or we'd be looking down the barrel.
I think that's what has provided us with Hamer, Sheaf and Walker.I think we also have the Wilson money to thank for that.
I think that's what has provided us with Hamer, Sheaf and Walker.
To my knowledge, it wasn't. Well not all of it anyway. I've been told today that the club are now in a good place financially after Wilson's sale. I doubt my contact would've said that if all of the money was already spent.
I hope that this is true, but considering I’ve heard that from various chairmen about as long as I’ve been a City fan and it’s never been true I won’t hold my breath.
They are not made on economic grounds. If these clubs got out of business the economic harm these communities face is huge.
The reason it was made was it's an easy and headline grabbing story.
So you realise that in order to try and keep some sort of containment on the virus things have to close. But on the other hand you can't close everything because people will have no work/income. So how do you choose which to close and which to keep open? Those that employ the most people. Pubs etc overall will employ far more people in them and their supply chains that the football league will.
On the other hand if you were making the decision on transmission it would be the pubs shutting every time as it's a more confined, indoor space which is more likely to result in people flouting rules due to drink.
So if the pubs are allowed to stay open and the football isn't it's being based on the economics, not the science..
It's not the only consideration that's been taken but it will be a big factor. I'm not saying it's right or that I agree with it
There is according to Boris Johnson.No there aren't you said there will be a six month lockdown - there is no sign of that at all is there?
Hamer and Walker were done before Wilson was sold so I doubt it.I think that's what has provided us with Hamer, Sheaf and Walker.
Yes and anyone expecting us to be still splashing cash on players will be disapointed.I think we also have the Wilson money to thank for that.
There is according to Boris Johnson.
I've already accepted we won't be back this season, and its a bonus if we are
Wrong decision for me.
The likes of Accrington, Rochdale, Oldham, this will kill them off. Severe problems within the football pyramid now
No conferences or exhibitions my heart has never bled so much
Gate receipts only make up 15% of Rochdales turnover. Whilst I get your point and agree to an extent, it's not going to be a death knell for every club.
I suspect Rochdale is much higher than that and the figure is distorted by £1.3m generated in player sales last year
Well I've been speaking regularly with their CEO recently who told me that figure himself, so I suspect it's not much higher than that.
Gate receipts only make up 15% of Rochdales turnover. Whilst I get your point and agree to an extent, it's not going to be a death knell for every club.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?