First time I've ever seen that tactic. The whole squad comes out, crazy! Was that a regular practice? Was that only a Man utd thing?

Hi Niall,

Blimey, on one hand you have the clubs who want to get back playing within weeks and on the other hand the WHO recommending suspending competitions until the end of 2021. It must be a legal minefield.

Personally, I don't see how you can get back to spectators at games until there is either a vaccine or a very effective treatment.

They were talking about maybe 1-2% of the population having had it, if that's true that leaves an awful lot of people still to get it, including the elderly and those with underlying health issues or are on immuno suppressant medication.

Morning socrates. To me it just sounds wrong to play games at all, even behind closed doors. Despite the long-term attempts to crack down on violent tackling, football can only be a contact sport.

The six foot rules cannot, and surely should not, be applied to football matches. It would make a mockery of the results. People would be unmarked at corners, walls for free kicks around the area wouldn’t be possible, and nor would tackling be possible. Presumably meaning anyone in possession would have a free run on goal leading to countless one on ones with keepers who wouldn’t be able to challenge the bloke through on goal. Any team using a pressing game wouldn’t be able to.

The whole thing sounds ridiculous but I would still say it’s unfair on the players to allow them to come into contact with each other, who in varying proportions probably will and won’t be infected. Okay, footballers are relatively young men with no underlying health issues, but does that make them safe? The skin of different players will come into contact with each other, without the six foot rule. Doesn’t that mean they’ll exchange each other’s perspiration onto their bodies (maybe not Özil as he doesn’t run around enough to sweat)? How about when they go home to wives and children after games? Players will come into contact with them, and maybe elderly parents.

I just think it’s wrong to say we don’t mind players catching it, so we’ll let them play games and come into contact with each other, but behind closed doors to protect those who actually go to games. In my view the season should be cancelled. Bad luck for some teams including the likes of Liverpool and Leeds, and most fortunate for others like Norwich. I say start football again when the crisis is finished to the extent that crowds can go to games.

The puzzlement/concern for me is just when that might be. It’s not at all clear how we are going to get out of this situation in any time soon. It seems to be either a vaccine or the virus just clears off. It will be no more safe in 6 months than it is now.

Hi Bernard,

I think the plan would be to test all players before the games start and then keep them quarantined in hotels whilst the season is finished (maybe 6 weeks or so). Games would be played as normal.

Obviously this is only a short term solution and could not work long term.

So many if's and buts re finishing the season. My proposal would be to finish this season however long it takes and once fans can go to watch the games. So if it takes til January/February, then so be it. Scrap all European club competitions including internationals. Scrap the Euros next year. Then kick off as normal August 2021 with the European comps as well. For the time being until further notice, only season ticket holders would be allowed to attend matches. I know realistically this won't happen.

The idea of playing loads of matches behind closed doors is a bit of a nonsense really. One off games are fine but a whole batch of them is just absurd. I honestly couldn't care about any of them, results wise. Or just null and void the season now and move on. The PL are desperate to conclude this season with so much money at stake though.

There is a belief that larger venues including theatres, cinemas and sports stadiums could be open around middle of June but that's just a prediction, nothing more.

Can’t see that being true for sports stadia. It will be no more safe then than it is now. If it were a possibility (which it isn’t) then the Premier League would be planning to complete the season using those venues.

I must admit it does seem a bit optimistic. Think the idea is that it we will be past the peak and things will be a lot more manageable, NHS etc. Only time will tell.

UEFA are still making noises about next season's European club competitions with the possibility of some domestic leagues being null and voided. I think a reality check is needed.

Hi Soc, I can't see how this is fair on the players and their families.

As Dec mentioned yesterday, large gatherings have been banned in Ireland now until the end of August. The league of Ireland runs from Feb-October so it looks like there's little possibility of that resuming until September at the earliest.

And the Liverpool vs Athletico Madrid game is coming under more scrutiny as well.

Hi Niall

It also means that the entire GAA season is gone. The attendances for those games are similar to PL matches. That decision wasn't taken lightly.

I can't see how contact sports can continue when everyone else is being pleaded with to observe social distancing.

Grassroots football will be devastated too, the kids are going to be absolutely gutted.

But what if we move to a situation where there is much lower risk and most economic activity resumes but large gatherings are still banned?

It seems to me that football involves two elements. 1) the game which involves a slight and highly manageable risk to the players. 2) the crowds which constitutes a massive public health risk. Surely 1) becomes feasible long before 2)?

Honestly can't see even games without fans happening this year, however.

Those packed stadiums must have been insane in those days. I can only imagine. That direct ball to the head, with how heavy those balls were in those days. Had to be like a AG punch to.....lets not go there.

Something tells me they would have scraped up a couple of good British nurses for Boris, Gaz. You are right about the others though.

That happened to me twice when I was at school so I can sympathise, particularly because of the raucous amusement it caused. A football to the back of the head, and a cricket ball to the shin. Utterly polaxed. Both times I was merely walking past the field too.

Do you mean it’s a slight and highly manageable risk because of the fewer numbers of players? Because players come into very close contact with each other, so I’m not sure I’d call it a slight or manageable risk for the players, regardless of how small in number they are. Myself, I am not sure that justifies playing games behind closed doors and my vote still goes for declaring the season null and void.

So in China they found out that 1 person went to a restaurant and infected 9 others out of the 15 in there including people who were sat on tables on the other side of the restaurant.

The press said even a closed doors match with Tv people and medical and club people would involve 250 odd people attending a game and mingling. On that basis I don’t think it comes down to your vote as until a vaccine is developed or the number of new cases reduced to a trickle less than a thousand a day surely then the season will have to be void.

One of my favorite moments ever.
"It's only Ray Parlour" hahahaha

Believe it or not, I do realise it won’t come down to my vote. I ways simply using an expression to emphasise what I think should happen. Judging by the end of your last sentence, it sounds like you agree whether or not you choose to use the same expression I did.

Not that worried but our MPs over here are, well some are, and they kick up a stink whenever Huawei are mentioned.

Brady's goal! Reminds me of Bergkamp. Oh, Sunderland and Stapleton aren't too bad either.

My point is that a football crowd is many orders of magnitude more risky. The there are 10s of 1000s of people in close proximity who cannot be screened and who it would be a nightmare to trace. Without a crowd there are 22 players (28 if all subs are used) all of whom can be screened, tested, and traced. Protocol can be worked out to keep other personnel (refs, security, coaching staff, unused subs, etc.) safe.

If the degree of risk drops gradually, it is inevitable that it will be 'acceptably safe' to play long before it is acceptably safe to have crowds.

And I would say that we have to talk about 'acceptably safe' rather than 'absolutely safe'. There has to be a degree of risk accepted. Firstly, as you note, football is a contact sport and players accept at degree of risk, not just of getting maimed but also of infection (as with HIV). Secondly, workers elsewhere have to accept risk. Essential workers and workers in retail have had to take the risk even when the disease was spreading out of control. As the spread is controlled it will be necessary to open the economy up in stages. Those who go back to work will inevitably be facing somewhat more risk than those who are able to remain at home. Sport may be far down the list of 'essential' items but the economic cost of shutting it down for a couple of years would be very high--as would the deprivation fans would suffer.

It seems we agree about one thing at least, Chris.

Calm down I wasn’t being tetchy or anything. I agree

Looks like Stan's going to court in St. Louis over the Rams move to LA. Not going to arbitration as he hoped. Among other things.

https://www.101espn.com/2020/04/21/an-i ... -in-court/

Hi Richie,

I can't see how theatres, pubs, cinema's and sport stadiums can possibly open until there is a vaccine, effective treatment or the virus just mutates into something weaker and gradually ebbs away.

Any mass gatherings would provide the perfect environment for a wave of new cases. Unless of course the govt decides to let some public places open up so that the virus gradually moves through the population whilst remaining below the level that would overwhelm the NHS. A very risky policy.

Have not read that but it makes sense. Just look at say 3000 away supporters crammed together. A few carriers and then look at before and after matches. Some people stay a little longer either end and eat and drink and stay in accommodation. Fly. High transmission rates possible. Then look at the home supporters and it becomes very scary.

Being reported here that the death rates appear to be much higher than reported in the UK. It is distressing.

I am not sure whether it is virus fatigue or just lethargy but at the moment I don't care when football starts again. More particularly I don't care if they ever start CL and Europa again. Maybe I will get back into it when it happens but at the moment I am thinking a little more locally.

Took in a new dog from a rescue situation, built a vegetable garden (haven't done one for 30 years) catch up on the phone with people, do groceries and get a takeaway coffee, exercise for me and the dog every day, learning watercolor painting, negotiate with the wife for the TV programs and that is it. I have a look on here and other places on the net including youtube which often has highlights of some great Arsenal victories but somehow or other I don't care who we are linked with for some silly transfer fee and if he wants double his wages. If there is one thing I would like is to spend some time with my son (we still ring him but he was inlockdown because of the flu) and for the aged care home where my mother resides to allow visitors again.

The only surprise for me was the city of St. Louis thinking they were 1. in a fair fight and 2. the NFL was going to choose St. Louis over L.A., the 2nd biggest media market, had no team there and I can think of multiple times they trying to move there. The road blocks have always been the league wanting the city to pay for part of it. Something they do to all cities. Billionaires asking tax payers to pay for them.

St. Louis has a strong case. If the NFL was smart they would have settled out of court long ago. My advice would have been to give St. Louis part of the revenue from the tv deal, merchandising over a certain length of time to compensate.

I think I said in a prior post I've never seen a big LA construction project come in anywhere close to near cost and in time. Ever. Just too many things involved in that. The city, county and state are involved and with that an encyclopedic set of rules that are sometimes at the whim of inspectors or an official. And unlike NYC, you don't have pay off officials as easily. In the old days at least, in NYC, the mob helped you, for a price, because they controlled literally all the unions involved in building and although costly, you could exact time constraints as part of that deal.

Not so in LA. Its a mess. Even down to the house level, if you ever seen any "flipping" houses for money shows, where there is always some local official saying this and that has to change.

I'm cheering for St. Louis. If nothing else for honour. Kroenke is a Missouri native, St. Louis is hometown, who helped move the team there for the pride of his home state and then effed them over for the sake of money.

The NFL could have granted St. Louis another franchise as it did with Baltimore, who moved their team, the Colts to Indianapolis but then later Baltimore got a new team called the Ravens. (Edgar Allen Poe lived in Baltimore).

I like how Arsenal got a mention in the article...hehehehe

My guess is the season isn't resumed and we simply start a new season. Not like it didn't happen before in WW2 with leagues around the world. That said, when a new season starts and if Liverpool doesn't win it, I have to start believe they are simply cursed. LOL.

Odds are they will be champions or worse runners for the foreseeable future but its a funny old game. It wouldn't be inconceivable to think City would win almost all titles in the immediate future after Ferguson retired.

It would have been even more hilarious had they stayed unbeaten when league play was suspended.

I personally am skeptical of ANY turnaround talk while Mustafi is on the payroll. I don't who comes or goes out. That's my barometer if they are serious.

https://www.football.london/arsenal-fc/ ... r-18134156
'20/21 title is ours!' - Arsenal fans go nuts as Thomas Partey transfer talks are confirmed

Has it not crossed your mind that it possibly has zero to do with being serious? If he does stay it could have much more to do with Arteta rating Mustafi a lot more highly than you.

Of course it's distressing but they're not comparing like for like. If it isn't per million of population then what's the comparison?

eg https://www.statista.com/statistics/110 ... habitants/ UK in 4th place but compare how much of our population lives in densely populated areas to say France and there's another explanation.

Apologies if you're not interested

Loving the unity

Two things are visibly different from yesteryears and today. 1. goal celebrations. Raised hands. Teammates coming over. That's it. 2. Fouls that would be a booking no question today were a waived off or a 'play on' in those days. Crazy. haha

Atletico have had a long interest in Lacazette. This summer could see very little net spend by many clubs, so a swap deal (although these are generally rare) could work.

If its turns out that the summer transfer market is more of a stick with what you've got for most clubs I think we can certainly be one of the teams who can be much stronger next year. More clubs will be relying on their youth system, and the upturn in performances and attitude since Arteta came is noticeable. I'm not saying what we have is good enough to get us top 4 but I think we'd certainly improve on 9th!

I wasn't aware of Atletico's interest in Lacazette. They are big enough where he wouldn't be opposed to a move I would assume. A swap would be ideal...and we send Mustafi as well as a 'bonus'

I hope we give Mustafi a new contract and he stays for years. Firstly, he’s improved greatly under Arteta so is arguably an adequate squad player. Secondly, just to annoy a tosser like you.