And in a nutshell, why? How do the FAI stand in court when the lawsuits come in because Harps went down by a point or Bohs miss Europe by a point or whatever and justify it?Quote:
Originally Posted by redobit
Printable View
And in a nutshell, why? How do the FAI stand in court when the lawsuits come in because Harps went down by a point or Bohs miss Europe by a point or whatever and justify it?Quote:
Originally Posted by redobit
You admitted to being biased, not me. I'm trying to be fair in an situation that is far from ideal.Quote:
Originally Posted by RathfarnhamHoop
Well as you said fair, not ideal but it would be fair, because it's the same rules for all the teams that's what fair is.Quote:
Originally Posted by RathfarnhamHoop
Im only putting forward a suggestion ffs. Untwist your biased knickers.
And how is counting games played already not the same for everyone?Quote:
Originally Posted by redobit
Never said it wasnt.
I think it could go any number of ways and made suggestions that I think can work (rightly or wrongly). You cant or dont want to accept that there is a validity in starting the season again. But as you said you are biased so it is pretty hard to have a conversation with a person with one mindset that suits only his needs.
Your suggestion involves simultaneously cancelling games due to time constraints and replaying games already played. That is just all kinds of wrong and just asking for a lawsuitQuote:
Originally Posted by redobit
I'm beginning to see that there is some substance in redobit's thesis
Nope, never said to replay any games already played. That would be daft.Quote:
Originally Posted by RathfarnhamHoop
Other FAs, rugby, womens leagues have scrapped leagues with a lot more games played than us. That could happen here and if it goes on long enough then re-start. Hardly a mind blowing suggestion in fairness.
Your suggestion would have Shamrock Rovers playing Dundalk for example three times in the Airtricity League in the year 2020 but only two counting for the league. That is replaying a game. And that is lawsuit central.Quote:
Originally Posted by redobit
They have scrapped leagues because they have more games played. They're not scraping the season to start the same season again because that's ****ing daft.
Nope, not saying that either. Replaying a game is playing it twice, while restarting a season is a new set of games. If it goes on too long then clubs/ FAI could well agree to scrap and restart, then the first few games are gone. Its only a suggestion, I have zero fukcing idea if that will happen, nobody does, but better to put all suggestion on the table and see what is the best and fair for all clubs in the LOI. At least if everything is on the table it gives us options based on how long this lasts. Its pretty funny that you can't even fathom or comprehend that the season might start again, but as you said you're biased, so hey no surprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by RathfarnhamHoop
I've binned the last few posts from this thread. Please get back on topic.
@redobit quit the wumming, I've never had any truck with it and even less so now.
@RathfarnumHoop chill out, you're allowing yourself to get wound up over a bloody forum post.
@MartinHo II if you have a problem with a post, why don't you report it instead of adding to the frustration by bitching about moderation.
@ToberonaTornado thanks for the report but I'm not deleting the thread, it's a perfectly legitmate topic if people stick to it.
Just to get this back on track - what do people think is the minimum amount of games that needs be played for a league to be considered legitimate?
My thoughts from earlier quoted below.
With 18 games, that's another 13/14 games to be played, which could be crammed into...8-10 weeks?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
But I also wonder about some of the new signings that arrived in Ireland for this season? Are they still here? Still under contract? Will clubs even have a squad left to play a possible 13/14 games?
It would have to be at least 2 rounds, home and away. Unless of course Shamrck Rovers drop enough points and Dundalk dont well then they can call it after 7 games which would be totally fair and reasonable from a completely unbiased perspective!
Things are looking better for a return in September if not before. It would be reasonable to extend the league in to January if need be and either have a much shortened off-season or start 2021 later and over a period of time move back to the 'normal' schedule.
If player contracts are currently suspended ye'd hope that that they are reinitiated with dates ammended. if it doesnt suit a player to do then a mutual termination happens. For some clubs I suppose the important thing is to get games back on even if it means a weakened side, get gate receipts going again but chucking out a season's target. Money saved by a reduction in a wage bill could be allocated to 2021. I would think that the vast majority of players would want contracts honoured even with changed dates. If clubs are significantly effected in an ongoing manner and try to regnegotiate terms thats where the problems could really kick up in due course.
I've been socially distancing myself from COVID-19 discussions - serious ones anyway.
Because things are bad enough like.
I've said it already, finish this season out to 27 games. Can't really be any less than that given contracts, season tickets, and sponsorship deals.
If it has to start again in July or August instead of June, so be it. Play it through until January or February 2021. Start the following 2021 season in April or May and play another shortened 27 game season until December. That'll bring us back to another Feb/March start for 2022.
It's another 10 weeks until the 19th June date given by FAI. Realistically, we won't be out of the woods by then, but you'd certainly expect a relaxation of social distancing by then to allow players to resume training.
Looking at a further month, 17th July looks a reasonable restart date. There's 29 available Fridays between then and the end of January 2021. That should be more than enough time to finish off a 27 game season along with FAI Cup, allowing for 3 or 4 midweek fixture dates, and no calling off rounds of the league for cup from quarter final onwards.
Failing that, 14th August resumption allows to end the season end of February instead.
The idea of an 18 game season, where four or five of those games have already been played, should come nowhere near the discussion.
Don't agree an 18 game season shouldn't be considered. Everything should be considered at the moment.
But the other factor no-one's mentioned is that even if restrictions are lifted in, say, June and the season resumes in late June, it's entirely likely that the virus would just take off again and another lockdown would follow in September for 6 weeks. What happens then?
Oh dear - put the hard hat on nigel unless RH has suddenly taken up yoga!Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
He's okay, he's not suggesting replaying the games, just that it'd be too short ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
I still disagree mind, I think clubs will look at it from the pov that every game is money in their pocket and less to pay back for season tickets, but its a valid opinion.
Phew! Hard hat can be put away. I doubt anyone wants a shortened season. I for one would want to play Rovers 4 times to have the maximum chance of overtaking and pulling ahead. With 2 rounds though there is at least balance with one home and away fixtures. That I can see being acceptable to clubs and supporters. There is the issue of losing the value of season tickets, would fans generally go lookng for a 50% refund due to half the games being played. Losing gate receipts and refunding ST holders could be a nail in the coffin for some clubs. Take Bohs where such a large proportion of their tickets are ST, it would be a big hole in the finances if fans insist on refunds. I wouldnt want a refund from my club but how would others feel?
The other way of doing it would be to offer people a reduction for next seasons season ticket based on them missing games this season
Yup! There are solutions for such things and hopefully supporters will show patience. But again going back to the legalities if there was a supporter with a nose out of joint they could cause a good amount of grief that also could snowball.
Reading the figures and all the other bits and pieces on covid-19 in 'trade' journals, there looks to be a serious risk of people taking a foot off the accelerator on all this at the moment. Its wrong to think in this way in general but also another 2-3 weeks will show most of the data needed to create models for more concrete decisions to be made. With this in mind a mid summer resumption (I nearly said restart eeeek) is possible if we keep the heads below the parapet and for another while we may not need to hit the doomsday button! I say this with the general consideration of a future rebound.
It is completely irrational as LoI fan but there would be some element of amusemnet if the current EPL was cancelled on Liverpool after fas waiting 3 decades.
Obviously, we'd all prefer more rather than fewer games, but external factors will dictate how many games get played and whether even finishing the season at all is possible.
My question wasn't about how people would like/prefer to see the season finished, as much as what's the minimum number of games that need to be played for it to be a legitimate season.
For me, 18 is acceptable as it includes both home and away. Anything less is too short. 27 is better obviously, if possible, but who knows. As Stu said, even if things did get going again, a winter return of the virus would bring the whole thing to a halt.
I don't think it's a case of a winter return of the virus - it's just that lockdown will probably be lifted way before cases come down to nil, because we can't stay locked up forever.
Simon Harris has already suggested it could be a case of, say, four weeks with lockdown, then four weeks normal during which cases grow again, and then lockdown again, all in order to allow health services cope effectively until a vaccine is found.
If that happens, then there's going to be zero chance of a 2020 season, and 2021 is in doubt as well.
In that scenario we are looking at huge changes for society, pubs, restaurants among other businesses will close down in droves . That will result in hundreds of thousands in long term unemployment. The league of Ireland in such a climate would either have to go into prolonged hibernation ie release all football and all non essential playing staff or collapse. We are looking at our WW2 this virus has to be vaccinated for victory.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Absolutely.
Which is why comments like "A 18-game season should be nowhere near the discussion" are daft.
There isn't a single reliable estimate as to how all this will pan out and when
Active and passive immunity above 60% is needed. Wont happen without finding a vaccine or let people pick up the bug. Its also looking that any immunnity isnt forever so a worry!!
A 60% infection rate is literally decades away at the current rate though
3m people at 500/day (today's - record - rate) is 16 years
Right but infection doesn't grow in a linear fashion. It has been exponential for the most part. We've manage to keep the daily growth rate fairly low, at ~10%, but even at 10% each day we get to 60% of the population infected by mid June.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
True, but the whole point of the lockdown is to try combat the exponential growth and create linear growth.
And it's working in countries such as Spain, Italy and Germany, where growth has been roughly linear the past three weeks for example. (Usual comment about believing their figures - it's probable that every country's figures for number of cases is wrong, but the deaths figure has been fairly linear too) Our own growth had been fairly linear for the past week too, though yesterday saw a big jump. That may be a jump to a new level of normal, or it may be an outlier; we don't know yet.
Ultimately, even exponential growth has an average number of cases per day - to get herd immunity by mid-June is an average of 50k cases per day (ending up at 300k cases per day). I obviously don't believe this will take 16 years to work its way through - that was just an indication of how big a figure herd immunity is - but I don't believe we'll be remotely close to it by mid-June either.
We won't be because we're likely at or are approaching our peak. We've slowed daily growth, and if we can continue to do so should see daily growth approach 2 or 3% in the next week or so, which would hopefully mean we have fewer people needing hospital treatment each day, Assuming we don't see people start to ignore the advise to remain indoors due to the bank holiday/good weather.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The problem with exponential growth is our minds are not good at understanding how it actually works. The example I give is to imagine that someone said they would give you a penny today, andthey wold double the amount they give you each day for 30 days. At the end of 30 days you would have over 10 million euro.
At 10% growth the total doubles every week rather than every day, and that has a significant impact down the line, after 10 days of 10% daily growth 1,000 cases becomes 2,594. At 30% that same 1,000 cases becomes 13,786 and you see the health service be completely overwhelmed.
In your comment you sad that yesterday saw a big jump, but in percentage terms yesterday was not an outlier. 500 cases yesterday was an 8.23% increase on the previous total. We have only had 5 days with growth below that since we reached 100 cases. So in raw numbers it seems high but when you compare the daily growth rate it is just a minor speed bump. Our average growth over the last three days is +7.02%.
The other issue is confirmed cases vs actual infected. We (and all countries) have no idea how many people are walking around asymptomatic. We may never know, or we may develop a way to test for those who have been infected and recovered. Its a very real possibility that our actual infected number is 2 or 3 times higher than our confirmed infected, which would mean we reach 60% at a much earlier date.
I know how exponential growth works - any chess player knows the story of the reward for inventing the game, which was a grain of wheat on the first square, 2 on the second, 4 on the third, and so on - but the point remains that the lockdown is there to combat exponential growth, to turn it into linear growth and even slowing growth. And it has been doing so for a number of weeks in other countries, so it stands to reason it should do so here as well. And yes, I know figures aren't necessarily correct - I acknowledged that point in my post.
But the question is - where does all this end? Not in mid-June (IMO) with herd immunity. Say we succeed in restricting growth to 3% as per your suggestion - well then 3m cases is reached at the start of November, when there's 100k new cases per day. And herd immunity isn't the end anyway - it's just the beginning of the end. You've still got a huge amount of sick people (1 million or so, assuming it lasts 14 days) and a shattered economy. How does that all work? Certainly the 2020 season is gone. Heck, half the league is gone, because sponsorship will be hammered, the bankrupt FAI won't be able to help, and the bankrupt state won't be able to help the FAI. So that's why I think talk of ruling out 18-game seasons is really trite.
But a graph I've seen and which is really logical to me - I can't find it now; it came from an MIT paper - is that we are in lockdown now until cases reduce to, let's say, 50 per day. Then lockdown is lifted for three weeks, during which cases go back up to 500 per day. We shut down for six weeks - cases go up to 1000 per day initially, which let's say is the max we can deal with, but then start to reduce to 50 per day again, at which stage lockdown is lifted again. This could go on until a vaccine is developed - which could be two years.
Will that happen? I have absolutely no idea. But it has to be a possibility; there's already talk of the virus resurfacing in China and Korea. And if, as Nesta suggests, you can catch it twice, well then it becomes more plausible again. So I don't think we can remain quite so focussed on the idea of exponential growth when we're trying everything we can to avoid it. And that starts to give up a whole other set of conclusions for sport, and society in general.
Found that chart actually. How does the LoI (and society) work around this? The blue boxes are lockdown periods.
Again, I don't know if this will happen. But it's plausible, and completely separate from the exponential models.
https://cdn.technologyreview.com/i/i...cw=1245&ch=762
The prospect of that graph is damn scary when considering the impact and cost to society. I do think that societal behaviour wil adapt to cope - some things that will seem crazy now but will become the norm. At large gathering eg football matches people will be wearing masks, not the flimsy disposable types and they will be worn to reduce the risk of infecting others not to protect yerself, correct use, disposal etc will become second nature. The non-dominant hand will become almost dominant eg picking things up in a supermarket, opening doors hence reducing cross infection as we dont touch our face as often with the non-dominant hand where the virus might be. The usual and should be done anyway proper handwashing wll become the rule rather than the exception with sanitizers everywhere. It wouldnt surprise me to see infrared thermometer type devices installed at entrances of shops, turnstiles etc (I should patent that Idea). People will stop shaking hands and and will distance as much as is possible. Ground capacities will probably be reduced, particularly at larger venues than the average LoI spot - Hill16 would be an example. There are a whole load of measures that will come in to play but adapting to these new circumstances are as needed as an annual vaccine programme in due course - lets hope there wont be further mutation on that basis. Contact tracing will be common place with 14 day quarantines ordered, people working from home, the list will be endless but all to do with not ending up in a pattern like the graph above.
Would this mean that even if the league was to restart there would first need to be a risk assessment on grounds. It could mean reduced terrace space and a certain amount of people in a seated row all seated apart. It sounds plausible in theory but very impractical to implement. Take Richmond for example which has limited amount entrances , limited space behind the main stand & none behind the terrace and limited toilet facilities. The only ground in Dublin imo capable of maintaining social distancing and still allow numbers would be tallaght.
You can't get around this by restricting terracing/stand capacity. You've still got people milling through turnstiles, around chip vans, in the club shop, etc.
Limiting numbers in itself could limit spread. There isnt any single solution so the above were examples. Entering a ground through turnstiles can be managed with appropriate queuing compared the way people converge en masse on entrances. If food points turn out to be infetion vectors then they would just go, similar with Bars, the league could resume but club bars/shops may not open. So yeah doing risk a assessment is exactly what it is and doing somthing about the 'risk'. Everything would need complete cooperation from fans for it all to work. It isnt about eradicating the virus, just limiting it. No easy or even practical but we will all see the world as a different place now and it could well end up doing anything that it takes irrespective of inconvenience - something is better than nothing
But we had our first case a little over a month ago. Now, despite restrictions, we've 7k cases.
We either get to nil - pretty much impossible as we'd have to test everyone - or this will just blow up again. Helped by people going to football grounds and all that entails.
We mightn't like it, but that's surely the reality. This is here until we find a cure.
There's an awful lot of "the war will be over by Christmas" views about this (not just on here)
If the league has to be cancelled it has to be done by the start of June to limit the financial impact. I thought the June date given was achievable at the time it was announced but now starting to see it as fanciful at best. If we want a league to follow when the dust settles a decision is looming. They will have to put clubs into cold storage to survive and see this out for a 2021 resumption.
I dont disagree with you, but I do feel when the lockdown is lifted to whatever extent there will still be restrictions and they are very likely to include sports gatherings. The onging restrictions could lessen as systems and procedures are implemented, it is doable if people buy in to new behaviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu