Generic Virus Thread

[Genie]

4 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Maybe there is no evidence because sport was banned?

@HanoiVillan and @StefanAVFC pretty much answered it themselves. 
It’s pretty much impossible to confirm exactly where they caught it so they can say probably not playing football because it supports that argument.

As I’ve said about 6 times, breathing harder and faster around others MUST be a risk factor. 

[StefanAVFC]

The comment that kicked this off was 'How did footballers catch it if not on the pitch?'

Well, changing rooms, gyms, canteens, physios - all INDOOR spaces. How can you not see that these are the areas that it was more likely to spread via, and not in a open air pitch? 

All it would take is for one player to catch the virus elsewhere (plausible considering they have partners and families) then there would be a load of spaces for it to spread. The pitches, in open air, with billions and billions of fresh air modules compared to internal spaces; you talk about common sense...

[sidcow]

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

But that's not true, is it? Elite sport hasn't been banned, and indeed there's been good reason for clubs to be greatly interested in the question of when and how the virus is transmitted. Amateur sport was allowed throughout most of this country in summer and autumn, and similarly was allowed in several European countries, or parts thereof.

Elite sport here under very strict conditions with lots of testing.

Other European countries who didn't have masses of cases, and who didn't have the much more contagious UK version (which is now ripping through them like a knife through butter).

People say show me the evidence but it's almost impossible to work out exactly where/how someone caught the virus 

Thanks, but if I am going to agree with a random on a website that says banning sport in the face of a deadly disease was ridiculous, I would first like to see the scientific community generally agree that its a low risk thing and should be continue.

[Genie]

7 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

The comment that kicked this off was 'How did footballers catch it if not on the pitch?'

Well, changing rooms, gyms, canteens, physios - all INDOOR spaces. How can you not see that these are the areas that it was more likely to spread via, and not in a open air pitch? 

All it would take is for one player to catch the virus elsewhere (plausible considering they have partners and families) then there would be a load of spaces for it to spread. The pitches, in open air, with billions and billions of fresh air modules compared to internal spaces; you talk about common sense...

It was the comment “zero evidence” that kicked it off.

Apart from the facts and the science that is correct.

You’re using the fact it’s impossible to trace the source of the infection to support your theory, despite the science saying some could happen on the sports field.

Its not the most likely place in the world to catch it, but it’s possible for the reasons stated. If you think it’s impossible then it’s up to you, but you’d be wrong.

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Genie

[StefanAVFC]

The evidence says the contrary. No documented spread events have come from outdoor events. This is also supported by both common sense and logic, as in the open air, the virus droplets are massively diluted. You put the same amount of squash in a bathtub, as in the ocean, you taste it less in the ocean.

Regardless of the heavy breathing and panting. Also as Hanoi stated, for the majority of a football match, you're not close to anybody else.

It's pretty obvious that the likely place that footballers caught the virus was in their personal setting, and it's pretty obvious that it spread through clubs INSIDE the training ground, not on the pitch. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by StefanAVFC

[Seat68]

Lovely bit of news. Usual Sunday caveats apply. 
 

 

[Genie]

7 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

The evidence says the contrary. No documented spread events have come from outdoor events. This is also supported by both common sense and logic, as in the open air, the virus droplets are massively diluted. You put the same amount of squash in a bathtub, as in the ocean, you taste it less in the ocean.

Regardless of the heavy breathing and panting. Also as Hanoi stated, for the majority of a football match, you're not close to anybody else.

It's pretty obvious that the likely place that footballers caught the virus was in their personal setting, and it's pretty obvious that it spread through clubs INSIDE the training ground, not on the pitch. 

Why are subs spread out so much? Why do they wear masks? Why do they sanitise the balls? Why are they told to avoid hugging during celebrations?

Its madness to deny there is some risk.

Serious question, do you think it’s impossible to catch Covid playing football?

[Mandy Lifeboats]

The "absence of evidence" is not "evidence of absence". 

[StefanAVFC]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

Why are subs spread out so much? Why do they wear masks? 

Because sitting next to someone without a mask isn't running around in an open space.

1 minute ago, Genie said:

Why do they sanitise the balls?

Surface transmission still hasn't been ruled out, but it's likely it isn't a significant method of spread. Until it's proven 100%, then sanitising everything is the right approach.

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

Why are they told to avoid hugging during celebrations?

Really?  Guess.

3 minutes ago, Genie said:

Serious question, do you think it’s impossible to catch Covid playing football?

Nothing is impossible. However, it's highly unlikely. This goes back to the topic of humans being awful at judging risk. At some point, benefit outweighs the risk. For outdoor sport, that benefit has outweighed the risk from the start (based on the evidence we have) and we have been massively over-cautious in our approach towards it.

I just feel like from your posts on here, you any ANY % of risk as a go-ahead to implement restrictions. There will ALWAYS be a risk of infectious disease in our lives; we have to accept that and get on with it.

[bannedfromHandV]

31 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Seems like a lot of actual qualified virology experts said playing sport, unless under extremely controlled conditions, was not a good idea. 

Again, we seem to have this ludicrous attitude of some that the Government just ban people doing stuff for shits and giggles.

It's actually hilarious that you are making accusations of amateur virology experts when the OP actually said that banning sport was ridiculous........well who is the one who doesn't know anything about it disagreeing with the actual experts then?

Everyone’s an expert now apparently, but you keep parroting the government sponsored experts and I’ll do me and let’s see where we all end up over the next 12 months or so.

[Genie]

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

Nothing is impossible. However, it's highly unlikely.

Unlikely / highly unlikely, it seems like you’re open to the idea it’s possible, so therefore there must be some evidence to support it (despite your opening comment).

3 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I just feel like from your posts on here, you any ANY % of risk as a go-ahead to implement restrictions. There will ALWAYS be a risk of infectious disease in our lives; we have to accept that and get on with it.

I’m delighted football has restarted as the benefit vastly outweighs the risk, especially in youngsters. I’m delighted the UK is starting to remove restrictions in a structured way.

What frustrates me are inaccurate anti-lockdown posts or criticisms of what is happening because it doesn’t suit a minority.

 

[sidcow]

4 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Everyone’s an expert now apparently, but you keep parroting the government sponsored experts and I’ll do me and let’s see where we all end up over the next 12 months or so.

So to be clear, you think the Government are paying scientists to make us lockdown more?  Listen to yourself.  

[a m ole]

One thing I will say, is that we haven’t seen evidence of transmission club to club - for example no cases at Man Utd after we played them 2 days before we had how many cases? You’d expect to see some link between matches played if there was significant increased risk with sport playing.

[Genie]

2 minutes ago, sidcow said:

So to be clear, you think the Government are paying scientists to make us lockdown more?  Listen to yourself.  

I thought it was Bill Gates? Are the government paying him or is he paying the government?

[StefanAVFC]

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

Unlikely / highly unlikely, it seems like you’re open to the idea it’s possible, so therefore there must be some evidence to support it (despite your opening comment).

But there isn't any evidence that playing outdoors in the open air is a method in which the virus spreads. The evidence points the other way, with no documented spread events from outdoor exposure. I was never saying there isn't a chance of it, but there isn't any evidence. I mean, your 'evidence' is very much chinny reckon as Hanoi states. You've heard how the virus spreads, so it's inconceivable that it wouldn't spread effectively via huffing and puffing blokes. I'm sorry, but science doesn't work like that.

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

I’m delighted football has restarted as the benefit vastly outweighs the risk, especially in youngsters. I’m delighted the UK is starting to remove restrictions in a structured way.

It has always outweighed the risk. 

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

What frustrates me are inaccurate anti-lockdown posts or criticisms of what is happening because it doesn’t suit a minority.

What frustrates me is parroting of pseudo-science with no basis or evidence. 

[sidcow]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

I thought it was Bill Gates? Are the government paying him or is he paying the government?

Bill Gates is tracking the scientists on behalf of the Government to ensure they tow the party line and ensure that the country loses much more money than we are already and to ensure that peoples mental health is completely destroyed on purpose for no good reason.

[sidcow]

6 minutes ago, a m ole said:

One thing I will say, is that we haven’t seen evidence of transmission club to club - for example no cases at Man Utd after we played them 2 days before we had how many cases? You’d expect to see some link between matches played if there was significant increased risk with sport playing.

Players are tested all the time, there is almost zero chance of a positive player from one club playing another.  I am not sure if the same strict rules would apply for The Rose and Crown v The White Horse.

[sidcow]

4 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

What frustrates me is parroting of pseudo-science with no basis or evidence. 

Finally we agree

[stuart_75]

No mention of footballers catching COVID by sharing the same sex-workers 

[bannedfromHandV]

24 minutes ago, sidcow said:

So to be clear, you think the Government are paying scientists to make us lockdown more?  Listen to yourself.  

I think the government have not had a grip on this entire situation from minute one, so forgive me for paying little heed to their continued scaremongering.

And i think the government are paying people to do far worse things than keep the population in a perpetual state of fear, that’s likely the tip of the iceberg.