Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Wee Bully]

So just to clarify, the SG (and all Govts) have 4-5 weeks to provide final data/assurances to UEFA over crowd attendance at the Euros.
Why are people losing their heads over speculative media reports?  is someone at the SFA / UEFA playing them to increase the pressure on SG I wonder.
That said it would be unforgivable if the SG's decisions lead to problems with Hampden and fans attendance at the Euros, but if anyone has learned anything over the last 12 months is that there is no way the SG will provide public committments a month before they need to, and they're probably already working with the SFA on this.

Apparently if you don’t lose your head, it is because you are entrenched in your political views.

I agree we should be going ahead. I’m just saying it’s not clear that we aren’t.

[G51]

9 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

So just to clarify, the SG (and all Govts) have 4-5 weeks to provide final data/assurances to UEFA over crowd attendance at the Euros.

Why are people losing their heads over speculative media reports?  is someone at the SFA / UEFA playing them to increase the pressure on SG I wonder.

That said it would be unforgivable if the SG's decisions lead to problems with Hampden and fans attendance at the Euros, but if anyone has learned anything over the last 12 months is that there is no way the SG will provide public committments a month before they need to, and they're probably already working with the SFA on this.

The articles are saying that the Irish, Scottish and Spanish governments have been significantly more cautious on this than the countries for the other nine cities. That's why people are concerned.

[Burnieman]

Just now, G51 said:

The articles are saying that the Irish, Scottish and Spanish governments have been significantly more cautious on this than the countries for the other nine cities. That's why people are concerned.

You're suprised the SG is more cautious?

[G51]

7 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

You're suprised the SG is more cautious?

I'm surprised the Scottish Government is more cautious than countries that are nowhere near the level of vaccines administered that Scotland is, yes.

Quite frankly, the Scottish Governments caution is not warranted. Everyone is supposed to have a first jab by the end of May, so the overwhelming majority of people will have COVID antibodies by the start of the Euros.

If Scotland loses the chance to see its own national team play games at home in the Euros, simply because the Scottish Government have bottled it, then it's unforgivable and the fallout will be enormous.

[craigkillie]

22 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

So just to clarify, the SG (and all Govts) have 4-5 weeks to provide final data/assurances to UEFA over crowd attendance at the Euros.

Why are people losing their heads over speculative media reports?  is someone at the SFA / UEFA playing them to increase the pressure on SG I wonder.

That said it would be unforgivable if the SG's decisions lead to problems with Hampden and fans attendance at the Euros, but if anyone has learned anything over the last 12 months is that there is no way the SG will provide public committments a month before they need to, and they're probably already working with the SFA on this.

The fact that the gormless Chris McLaughlin is being used to run this story suggests that the SFA are worried about this not going ahead.

[Monkey Tennis]

40 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

 many of us want to move on, as indeed all the scientists worth listening to also agree. 
  

Are the "scientists worth listening to" the ones whose readings most closely resemble your own by any chance?

[Todd_is_God]

3 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Are the "scientists worth listening to" the ones whose readings most closely resemble your own by any chance?

The same could be said about "following advice" when the advice isn't unanimous.

Governments follow the advice they want to.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

So just to clarify, the SG (and all Govts) have 4-5 weeks to provide final data/assurances to UEFA over crowd attendance at the Euros.
Why are people losing their heads over speculative media reports?  is someone at the SFA / UEFA playing them to increase the pressure on SG I wonder.
That said it would be unforgivable if the SG's decisions lead to problems with Hampden and fans attendance at the Euros, but if anyone has learned anything over the last 12 months is that there is no way the SG will provide public committments a month before they need to, and they're probably already working with the SFA on this.

As someone pointed yesterday afternoon, this is becoming a daily cycle on this thread.

Morning - post news article - heads gone.

Mid-afternoon - further research proves said article is either inaccurate, sensationalist or both.

Late evening - getting primed for that morning heads gone.

Today's uproar seems to have been caused by newspapers picking up on an inaccurate article in one of the news agencies.

The old "check your facts and sources" comes to mind.

That being said, think we've all been prone to do it - it's an instant reaction sometimes.

[Billy Jean King]

This story came up yesterday in a variety of different places - the one I saw was in the Irish Examiner claiming that Dublin was basically finished and that Glasgow and Bilbao were both at risk. Given the very well placed sources, I think there's a lot of truth in it, and it is certainly not a BBC "anti govt scare story". UEFA will very clearly want to have games in front of fans, because it's better for absolutely everyone than the continued nonsense of behind closed doors football.
These are large events which require tickets to be sold, and therefore host cities are being asked to provide a plan for getting fans in so that these logistics can be carried out reasonably. Various other governments across Europe, including those who are currently in a much worse state than us, appear to have no issues with making these plans. It's not about concrete absolute facts, but it's about saying "here's what we think we'll be doing".
If the Scottish government are so risk-averse or blinkered that they can't even put forward a plan then that is absolutely a failure on their part and they deserve to be criticised for it.

They should be and will be if it comes to pass. For now it's speculation and rumour, nothing more.

[Monkey Tennis]

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

The same could be said about "following advice" when the advice isn't unanimous.

Governments follow the advice they want to.

Indeed.

I just find it amusing when people with no expertise or insight make judgements like these as to whose opinions, among those with plenty, are valid?

[madwullie]

1 hour ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

So restricting peoples right to freedom and movement is not a massive restriction? That’s an interesting point of view. 

Saying you can't go to the football is pretty different from restricting freedom and movement. There are actual measures that have been in place in many countries over the past while restricting movement and freedom. These should be complained about and eventually protested as the data drops. 

Saying you won't commit now to having thousands of fans at a football match in 3 months time really isn't a massive breach of your rights or freedoms. You don't have a right to know that you can definitely, not just maybe, go to the football in 3 months time. 

[madwullie]

1 hour ago, WATTOO said:

Nothing to see here as suspected.

April 12th is the deadline date Uefa have given and Ireland, Spain & Scotland have said they'll confirm closer to the time when they have a better understanding of the situation.

So Yes, it was all scaremongering.

Any decent journalist would  have worded it, "Scotland , Ireland and Spain have until April 12th to sanction the return of fans to their stadia or they risk losing their host city's for the finals".

But of course that wouldn't have caused the desired "outrage"...............

He (the BBC reporter) literally said, and I'm  quoting, that the "date has been drastically brought forward". 

Why were UEFA happy to wait till April then are (according to the BBC) demanding the decision be made earlier? Are there other countries willing to guarantee now that will take our place - because if April was plenty of time before, I can't see why they still can't wait till April for the decision. 

[Honest_Man#1]

4 minutes ago, madwullie said:

Saying you can't go to the football is pretty different from restricting freedom and movement. There are actual measures that have been in place in many countries over the past while restricting movement and freedom. These should be complained about and eventually protested as the data drops. 

Saying you won't commit now to having thousands of fans at a football match in 3 months time really isn't a massive breach of your rights or freedoms. You don't have a right to know that you can definitely, not just maybe, go to the football in 3 months time. 

They are not looking for a cast iron guarantee that you will let fans in. If a variant runs rampant in the month of May they would be well within their rights to pull back. To outright say no rather than give an indication that all going well they expect to be able to allow x number of fans is not acceptable. 

As a few have said though, the deadline is a month away so let’s actually judge it once we get there.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

18 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Are the "scientists worth listening to" the ones whose readings most closely resemble your own by any chance?

If by the correct point of view then yes, yes they are. 

[Billy Jean King]

I'm not entirely sure that ANY country can give "assurances", name me a country in Europe which is currently allowing fans or that have any immediate plans to allow fans ?
Yes, we all know about Bojo's "irreversible" dates which are then followed by the caveat of "nothing is guaranteed", so Yes, while things are currently looking very good here in terms of the vaccine and the daily infections, I really don't see how any Government will be in a situation to provide "assurances" at this stage.
You could be forgiven for thinking this was political..........

On doing a Google search bar Bozo only Russia has so far provided and assurances. It's difficult to envisage Germany or Spain committing to crowds by June either as it stands especially if is vaccinated fans only.

[madwullie]

1 hour ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Its absolutely staggering that people can be so entrenched in their support for political parties that they would argue night was day just because people dare to criticise their wee view of the world. 

So as it turns out, its all "may, possible, could" speculation from the BBC that UEFA are distancing themselves from but that on here some people are so entrenched in their opposition of certain political parties and personalities that advise them, that they're willing to pounce on any speculative fragment of news criticising them with big heads gone energy because it fits their wee view of the world. 

[madwullie]

14 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Indeed.

I just find it amusing when people with no expertise or insight make judgements like these as to whose opinions, among those with plenty, are valid?

It's purely ideological now. Has been for a good few months. 

[Monkey Tennis]

1 minute ago, madwullie said:

It's purely ideological now. Has been for a good few months. 

For many on here it undoubtedly is.  As I say, I find it amusing.

It's not just Trump's America that saw this virus somehow become about identity.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, madwullie said:

He (the BBC reporter) literally said, and I'm  quoting, that the "date has been drastically brought forward". 

Why were UEFA happy to wait till April then are (according to the BBC) demanding the decision be made earlier? Are there other countries willing to guarantee now that will take our place - because if April was plenty of time before, I can't see why they still can't wait till April for the decision. 

My reading of the article is that the deadline is April 7th, although some countries have already given their "go ahead" (such as England), however I didn't read anywhere about UEFA themselves panicking, it seemed to be more the journalists personal "understanding" and "take" on things.

Like others have said, I will be very annoyed myself if we are denied this if things are still good and constantly improving and every other nation seems to be going ahead but us, however at the moment there's really nothing factual to suggest that this will be the case.

The long and short seems to be that 9 out of the 12 have already committed to opening stadia to fans and the other 3 are waiting until nearer the time to ensure they can make as realistic a committal as they possibly can.

Just to add, I'd cast peoples minds back to the proposed / promised easing of restrictions over Christmas and we all know how that turned out........

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

1 minute ago, madwullie said:

So as it turns out, its all "may, possible, could" speculation from the BBC that UEFA are distancing themselves from but that on here some people are so entrenched in their opposition of certain political parties and personalities that advise them, that they're willing to pounce on any speculative fragment of news criticising them with big heads gone energy because it fits their wee view of the world. 

Aye im that entrenched that I was a member of the snp and have voted for them all my adult life and praised openly NS’ performance yesterday on this very website and have on quite a few issues. Its not my fault you and a few others on here cannae take that your party is making a james hunt of the response to this pandemic. In the absence of a catastrophe there should be no reasonable argument against getting fans in to Hampden for June.