COVID-19 In Scottish Football

[vikingTON]

It isn't a basic condition of anyone else's employment to be policed as to where you can and cannot go in their own free time or else their entire industry gets shut down. When care home staff start getting knocked back from the pub then you'd start to have a moral case but they're not, so you don't.

I'd also put very little stock in those 'record high' polling numbers if the SG decides to throw another firework onto the bonfire so soon after its exams fiasco. I seem to recall other parties south of the border being in comfortable polling leads and ending up losing their majority quite recently and there's no reason to suspect that a jaded incumbent government up here is immune to that threat either. 

Edited August 12, 2020 by vikingTON

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

1 minute ago, virginton said:

It isn't a basic condition of anyone else's employment to be policed as to where you can and cannot go in their own free time or else their entire industry gets shut down. When care home staff start getting knocked back from the pub then you'd start to have a moral case but they're not, so you don't.

I'd also put very little stock in those 'record high' polling numbers if the SG decides to throw another firework onto the bonfire so soon after its exams fiasco. I seem to recall other parties south of the border being in comfortable polling leads and ending up losing their majority quite recently and there's no reason to suspect that a jaded incumbent government up here is immune to that threat either. 

"Jaded incumbent government" - Ah, I suspected this was your angle, but it's clear now.  It's as predictable as the sunrise.  The opposition, and its supporters have been predicting the end of the SNP since 2007.  You may not like this government, which is perfectly reasonable, and absolutely your right.  But such claims are eminently laughable.  Are you Jim Murphy in disguise?

It's nice that you have become self-appointed shop steward for professional footballers in Scotland, but their union, the SFA, and SPFL have already agreed to those conditions.  Of course they could have not agreed, which was absolutely their prerogative, but they didn't.  So a bit late to whine about it now. 

[Ken Fitlike]

Two ways I see it going:
Remove the split completely and play 33 games
Split after 22 games, which gives you 32 games and Sky still get their 4 OF games.

If ‘Rangers’ make the top six

[ropy]

1 hour ago, kingjoey said:

It’s undoubtedly to take a wee bit of the limelight off of the exam results.

That is a bizarre take

[ropy]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

 

Leitch was the one braying about how these footballers have been given a unique privilege by the government to play matches though, as if they were doing it for fun and not as employees working in a commercially important sector of the economy. 

Well the fact that about 75% of the government press conference was devoted to footballers breaking the rules!!!111!!! on the very same day that they made a ridiculous U-turn on the exam results was either i) cleverly planned political cover or ii) ridiculously fortunate. Given that they displayed zero political gumption in actually handling the exam story itself, I'm willing to believe that they at least wanted to crank up the moral outrage over another story instead. The old 'good day to bury bad news' political adage was made in reference to 9/11 FFS, never mind these comparatively minor controversies. 

I have no skin in the politics game but the press dictate the questions at these sessions.

[AndyDD]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

 

 

Well the fact that about 75% of the government press conference was devoted to footballers breaking the rules!!!111!!! on the very same day that they made a ridiculous U-turn on the exam results was either i) cleverly planned political cover or ii) ridiculously fortunate. Given that they displayed zero political gumption in actually handling the exam story itself, I'm willing to believe that they at least wanted to crank up the moral outrage over another story instead. The old 'good day to bury bad news' political adage was made in reference to 9/11 FFS, never mind these comparatively minor controversies. 

None of the announcements made by the First Minister were about football, though. The only reason football was even discussed was because that's what the majority of journalists who had requested questions wanted to ask her and Professor Leitch about. 

If your suggestion is that the Scottish media were going out of their way to assist the Scottish Government, well, that's your opinion. A completely laughable, risible opinion, but hey, it's all yours. 

On the wider point, as has been mentioned a few times now, postponing games is not about the threat of direct spread of the virus. It is about trying to force the football authorities, clubs and players to heed the warning that they must adhere to the rules in place or face a postponement of the league, a league which has been allowed to waive some of the rules that apply to the general public. The warning is being given in order to avoid any public health consequences of an uptick in rejecting the rules.  Statisticians have demonstrated a clear 'Cummings effect' in the public trust down south regards adherence, where high profile rule breaks that go unpunished have a tangible knock on to the wider population. 

It is painfully obvious that, until or unless there is a vaccine, the only defence against the virus will be behavioural moderation. That needs to continue and we have already seen drops in behavioural moderation resulting in localised spikes. Therefore it is quite plain that promoting and encouraging behavioural moderation most assuredly is a vital part of public health strategy. Frankly, it's all we really have. If that were to be abandoned wholesale the health service would be overwhelmed.

So, aye,  promoting, encouraging and cajoling high profile sports-people into adherence to the rules, in a very public manner, definitely is a public health issue, as is giving them a public dressing down. Postponing games is part of that. 

[Godric1970]

my take in all of this is there was nothing Celtic or Aberdeen could do the players decided to break the lockdown ... the clubs cannot oversee there players 24/7 ... the players are the ones who should be punished ie losing there licence to play in Scotland

 they are above the lockdown the only alternative is for players to wear trackers on there lower leg just above the ankle like ... i know it sounds drastic ... but the fate of the game in Scotland is at stake due to a group of players and a individual player believing 
 

Edited August 12, 2020 by Godric1970

[kingjoey]

44 minutes ago, ropy said:

That is a bizarre take

You’d have to be naive to think that it didn’t come into in any way.

[ropy]

1 minute ago, kingjoey said:

You’d have to be naive to think that it didn’t come into in any way.

Why have they orchestrated a train derailment today?

[scottmcleanscontacts]

Why have they orchestrated a train derailment today?

It's not a funny situation at all but there will Union loving loonies who might like to believe that.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

my take in all of this is there was nothing Celtic or Aberdeen could do the players decided to break the lockdown ... the clubs cannot oversee there players 24/7 ... the players are the ones who should be punished ie losing there licence to play in Scotland
 they are above the lockdown the only alternative is for players to wear trackers on there lower leg just above the ankle like ... i know it sounds drastic ... but the fate of the game in Scotland is at stake due to a group of players and a individual player believing 
 

Of course the clubs can do something but they haven't. If the players' behaviour doesn't qualify as gross misconduct,I don't know what does. If the clubs fail to deal with their employees' behaviour, it's only fair for the governing body to deal with the clubs, who have responsibilities under the HASAWA.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

21 minutes ago, Godric1970 said:

my take in all of this is there was nothing Celtic or Aberdeen could do the players decided to break the lockdown ... the clubs cannot oversee there players 24/7 ... the players are the ones who should be punished ie losing there licence to play in Scotland

 they are above the lockdown the only alternative is for players to wear trackers on there lower leg just above the ankle like ... i know it sounds drastic ... but the fate of the game in Scotland is at stake due to a group of players and a individual player believing 
 

Plenty of countries have strict liability for their fans. It is almost inconceivable that they don’t have strict liability for their players.

Celtic or Aberdeen may have a very comprehensive due diligence defence, that is they put in place strict protocols, tested them, and routinely checked their efficacy, but as everyone in any senior position of a company knows, you are still responsible for the actions of employees - all you can do is mitigate them.

There is an argument for both personal and collective responsibility, but the idea that any company (or football club) is not responsible is utterly absurd.

[Huisdean50]

By the way, it was the same Professor Leitch who said schools wouldn't close then to have them closed days later and also state the old form game could go ahead on a Thursday only to cancel the next day. He may like to portray himself as an expert but he has made plenty mistakes on this as well. 

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

"Jaded incumbent government" - Ah, I suspected this was your angle, but it's clear now.  It's as predictable as the sunrise.  The opposition, and its supporters have been predicting the end of the SNP since 2007.  You may not like this government, which is perfectly reasonable, and absolutely your right.  But such claims are eminently laughable.  Are you Jim Murphy in disguise?

I've voted SNP in every election and will comment on their current clown-car performance as I see fit, champ.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

I've voted SNP in every election and will comment on their current clown-car performance as I see fit, champ.

You do that, love

Edited August 12, 2020 by HuttonDressedAsLahm

[kingjoey]

19 minutes ago, ropy said:

Why have they orchestrated a train derailment today?

Great riposte.

[kingjoey]

9 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

Plenty of countries have strict liability for their fans. It is almost inconceivable that they don’t have strict liability for their players.

Celtic or Aberdeen may have a very comprehensive due diligence defence, that is they put in place strict protocols, tested them, and routinely checked their efficacy, but as everyone in any senior position of a company knows, you are still responsible for the actions of employees - all you can do is mitigate them.

There is an argument for both personal and collective responsibility, but the idea that any company (or football club) is not responsible is utterly absurd.

If you think that the SPFL are going to take points off Celtic or Rangers this season for any reason, you must be new to Scottish football. I would imagine that the reason that St Johnstone weren’t given the points for Saturday’s match, was that the SPFL could foresee that it was always a possibility that a similar thing could happen at Celtic and/or Rangers.

Edited August 12, 2020 by kingjoey

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

6 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

If you think that the SPFL are going to take points off Celtic or Rangers this season for any reason, you must be new to Scottish football. I would imagine that the reason that St Johnstone weren’t given the points for Saturday’s match, was that the SPFL could foresee that it was always a possibility that a similar thing could happen at Celtic and/or Rangers.

I didn't state anything to do with points deductions.  Celtic are being indirectly punished through game postponements, as are Aberdeen.

I don't know what the league rules allow for, but if they can happen, I'd expect them to be issued for any further breaches.  It may be the only tool they have in order to stave of a full Government suspension of the game.

And anyway, since when did we expect the football authorities to be consistent?

[kingjoey]

17 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Of course the clubs can do something but they haven't. If the players' behaviour doesn't qualify as gross misconduct,I don't know what does. If the clubs fail to deal with their employees' behaviour, it's only fair for the governing body to deal with the clubs, who have responsibilities under the HASAWA.

There is a problem here with dealing with the culprits. It isn’t the way things should be dealt with but the reality of the two cases so far is that Bolingoli is a small bit part player in Celtic’s squad and it will be easy to sack him, in fact that would probably strengthen the team. However, what would Celtic have done if it had been Edouard. Just binned him. I don’t bloody think so. Aberdeen have 8 very important players in their squad involved, and there is no way that they are going to get rid of the 8. Regardless of what anyone says, Aberdeen will undoubtedly be disciplining all of these players. I would also imagine that as all 8 are self isolating at the moment, the club will wait until they are back at Cormack Park before doing anything.

[Lebowski]

If you think that the SPFL are going to take points off Celtic or Rangers this season for any reason, you must be new to Scottish football. I would imagine that the reason that St Johnstone weren’t given the points for Saturday’s match, was that the SPFL could foresee that it was always a possibility that a similar thing could happen at Celtic and/or Rangers.

There is absolutely no one going to try to claim points because of games getting postponed, that's because there isn't a club in the country confident that their players aren't entirely capable of making as much of a c**t of it as those who have been caught.