You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Your Daily Question, Wednesday 22nd April. Time for sport to be allowed to resume?

2»

Comments

  • EnutEnut Member Posts: 3,438
    edited April 2020
    mumsie said:

    Enut said:

    Back on topic surely amongst the first sports that could cope with social distancing etc would be golf and tennis (singles). Team sports would be quite a way down the list.



    Shooting, Orienteering and Surfing could make early comebacks.




    Indeed, but I was thinking of sports that would have the most appeal to a TV audience, to keep the masses entertained, whilst watching in isolation.
  • TVSpiceTVSpice Member Posts: 1,242
    I'm going to be controversial here. I think football could come back if played behind closed doors. The players would have to effectively 'leave home' for a month or more along with all the support staff previously mentioned but this would be no different to them being away for a World Cup or something similar. Each team has already got some of the best medical staff around and the top clubs have some of the best facilities for any medical requirement so they are unlikely to need additional medics taken from the hospitals. Yes, they would have to have an ambulance in attendance but possibly, just possibly, a St John's ambulance could suffice given that there are no fans to be concerned about.

    The games would be played at a small number of grounds, not the usual home and away with travel therefore limited. The majority of hotels are not in use at the moment and so could easily be closed off for one team for the duration. In fact many top teams actually have rooms at their training facilities. So, in summary, I think it would be safe.

    As for should it come back, well yes again I think it should if all the above is taken care of. There are many fans up and down the country who by June/July will be tearing their hair out as lockdown rumbles on. A brief diversion with a football festival might just give some light relief to thousands. By July, I think there will anyway be some loosening of the restrictions with more back at work and if football takes all the necessary precautions, then let's do it!
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,746
    As this has taken on a football theme lets continue on that track. People claiming football 'withdrawal', the last Premier game was played 9th March,which was just 6 weeks ago.The usual Summer break is roughly 12 weeks so nothing to get concerned with yet.As for the suggestion of playing the remainder of the season with players/staff etc locked away behind closed doors for 5/6 weeks,would those same players/staff have a say in this or just be 'ordered' by the clubs to do as they're told regardless? Also regarding the 'testing',it's not a case of test everyone on the first day of the gathering and all are clear so everyone is ok.The testing would have to take place for every person,every day for a minimum of 14 days.What would the outcry be if for the sake of a few games of football,another person actually dies.It seems to me that the more driven force behind the agenda to restart football is as always MONEY.


  • TVSpiceTVSpice Member Posts: 1,242
    @lucy My understanding is that Sky have said they will not be asking for a refund if the games are not played. However, the £750m isn't just Sky & BT but the total cost of ALL the world rights for the remaining games so Sky's share, less than half of this amount might not make a difference in the decision making. Also, important to understand that the clubs might lose out on TV money but they will also lose out on their respective commercial deals plus refunds of season tickets and the rather expensive hospitality boxes. As for the players being locked away for a few weeks, most of them would sell their grannies if they were asked to do the same to play in a world cup!
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,746
    @TVSpice I only posted the Sky/BT as an after thought to my post as it happened to come up in my news feed whilst searching other things. But the testing scenario of all involved still stands.As for the players selling their grannies to play in a world cup,not to diminish the values of grannies,a world cup is a bit different to a run of the mill league campaign...
  • TVSpiceTVSpice Member Posts: 1,242
    @ Lucy4 You are quite right of course league vs world cup. But to go back to the testing. Let us not forget that private testing is available (and would be the road the clubs/PL would travel) at a cost. It is around (on average) £300 per test. So let's assume 50 people per club x £300 = £15,000 So, if they did that for fourteen days, it is less than quarter of a million pounds. Do that for eight weeks (to be generous) that would cost each club less than one million pounds,

    Less than £20 million for all PL clubs, for a test on 50 people every day for eight weeks (training & playing)

    Now compare that to the amount they might lose by not playing.
  • stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,776
    league vs world cup vs life whats more important
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,746
    Meanwhile clubs are 'furloughing'...
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,746
    And no doubt all the clubs will still be active in the transfer window.
  • TVSpiceTVSpice Member Posts: 1,242
    Lucy/Stokefc and all the others who say cancel, I understand your points completely but as I said at the start of my original comment, it might be controversial but I can see benefits too. We are not talking about next week or even next month. This is likely to not start (if it ever does) until mid June at the earliest.

    To write everything off now is too soon. To decide to go ahead right now is also too soon but should be under consideration with plans for safety of all concerned.
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,746
    The Premier League should draw a line,send a statement,set an example & send whatever other message to the sporting world that sport is ONLY that,a sport,and that there are far more important things in this world than kicking a ball about.
  • stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,776
    this is just my opinion
    i think they should scrap the 20/21 season and finish this season which from my perspective won,t re-start until christmas / new year minimum , start the 21/22 season as normal
    i could be way off the mark but this virus needs to be stopped completely before any large gatherings are acceptable
  • MAXALLYMAXALLY Member Posts: 17,606
    stokefc said:

    this is just my opinion
    i think they should scrap the 20/21 season and finish this season which from my perspective won,t re-start until christmas / new year minimum , start the 21/22 season as normal
    i could be way off the mark but this virus needs to be stopped completely before any large gatherings are acceptable

    I agree.

    PVFC are playing this Saturday ;)

    I am in the camp of NO sport until advised by the HEALTH/SCIENTISTS. I am non political btw.

    Widespread testing (as in the whole country) is a must before any recommence IMHO.

    One sport that could find a possible work around is snooker. With total testing, social distance crowds, players all in one hotel etc etc.


  • safc71safc71 Member Posts: 1,542
    Gary Neville on Sky Sports News reckons it would take over 40,000 tests on footballers to finish the season. He Worked it out as 36 squad members for 20 clubs at 56 days (8 weeks). I'am no Gary Neville fan but as he said we can't even test all the NHS staff and the carers so how can we justify starting football.
Sign In or Register to comment.