Football and the Coronavirus

Associate
Joined
5 Sep 2020
Posts
296
Given the Orient manager knew about multiple illnesses within the club before their match on Saturday, he along with whoever was involved should be fined and Orient docked points. If it puts them out of business in the long run, so be it.

Every club, including players, managers and staff has a duty of care to do as much as possible to keep the virus from spreading and Orient failed spectacularly and have now put the friends and family of the Mansfield players at risk.


Now I'm hearing, Orient spent the day trying to convince the EFL that the game could go ahead at their stadium, but the plug was pulled just two hours before the scheduled kick-off after 17 players from the League Two club tested positive.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Mar 2012
Posts
18,556
How? it's not the sports fault. Blame the virus and us Humans unable to keep our distances and staying home

Lets not turn this into a politics thread...


By all accounts the test Orient have failed Spurs paid for. If thats the case and Orient have been ignoring illnesses then they need punishing harshly. Absolutely braindead thinking.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Nov 2019
Posts
3,307
in fairness if they test positive but carry no symptoms what are they supposed to do if they don't have access to testing to tell them otherwise? It's only reckless if they knew, and we can't know whether they did or didn't from afar.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
25 Oct 2002
Posts
31,707
Location
Hampshire
It's a bit of an issue I think with these cup games. You've got West Ham playing Hull, West Ham offer to pay for the tests but Hull refuse because they don't want to risk having to miss matches or lose players. This then means West Ham are potentially exposed whereas normally they would only be playing against tested teams in the PL.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Sep 2020
Posts
296
It's a bit of an issue I think with these cup games. You've got West Ham playing Hull, West Ham offer to pay for the tests but Hull refuse because they don't want to risk having to miss matches or lose players. This then means West Ham are potentially exposed whereas normally they would only be playing against tested teams in the PL.

I saw that. Astonishing. Though I can understand Hull's thinking it's just wrong.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Mar 2012
Posts
18,556
I saw that. Astonishing. Though I can understand Hull's thinking it's just wrong.

I cant understand their thinking at all. Surely if a player could be asymptomatic youd want to know? Thats a shocking way to think.

If you refuse a test you should be kicked out of the competition. If an individual player does it give them a month ban from all football related activities.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Posts
24,070
Location
Lorville - Hurston
It's a bit of an issue I think with these cup games. You've got West Ham playing Hull, West Ham offer to pay for the tests but Hull refuse because they don't want to risk having to miss matches or lose players. This then means West Ham are potentially exposed whereas normally they would only be playing against tested teams in the PL.
It will be worse when we play against teams in Europe..
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Nov 2005
Posts
40,285
Location
Cornwall
Good for Spurs and probably the correct decision but a dangerous precedent has now been set and no club will be accepting offers to get their players tested from now on. Give it a few weeks and the Premier League will be suspended again unless both domestic cup competitions are cancelled or the powers that be make testing compulsory before matches.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom