Today’s piece is a divergence from my norm.
It may not show, but I do usually try to write something vaguely coherent and joined-up. No pretence of that today.
Rather, it’s a random set of thoughts around a common issue: the Restart, or not, of football. Each thought leads to a question-conclusion.
Among much that’s unclear – not to say bizarre – about Project Restart, one thing is evident. If two-thirds of the Premier League clubs agree to a proposal, the remainder are forced to comply – and that’s what’s going to happen. This project will get off the ground, even if subsequent developments bring it crashing back down.
I’m reading the helpfully specific guidance to players as they return to training. Social distancing is the watchword. No travelling, changing or eating together – and above all, nothing like physical contact on the training ground. No tackling, no “congested training”. Tactical sessions should be done by videoconference.
All very sensible. Except we’re going to jump straight from that into the hurly-burly, intense tackling and decided physical “congestion” of high-stakes games. WTF, as my younger relatives would say.
Question-conclusion: If such precautions are necessary for training, is it really safe to play games?
Moving on, we know there’s a big compromise necessary for any games to happen: there’ll be no fans present. I think we’re all reconciled to that. If we held out to play until normal crowds can be there, we might be waiting years.
A thornier issue, though, is neutral grounds. We were told emphatically last week – though a week may turn out to be a long time in Project Restart – that football could only resume in a limited number of stadia. The rationale was somewhat muddled, but a ‘secure’ environment and policing were certainly parts of it.
The outcry at the manifest unfairness of this was immediately ascribed by the media (not to mention by Liverpool fans) to the bottom six clubs. Indeed, they’d have particular cause to complain. Clubs like Villa and Norwich have far stronger home records than away and have most of their remaining scheduled games at home.
Home advantage isn’t simply a question of having the majority of fans. Familiarity with the ground, facilities and pitch dimensions, ease of traveling and much else contributes to it.
It now seems that the unease about neutral grounds was so widespread among PL clubs that it’s gone back to the authorities for a re-think. However, we know those authorities remain very keen to limit the number of stadia.
Question-conclusion: If safety requires the extreme measure of a limited number of stadia, is it really safe to play games?
A relatively new issue has been raised by our own Stuart Webber. He said he has no problem with relegation from the Prem and promotion from the Championship, as long as both are decided on the pitch. What couldn’t be accepted was a mix: relegation decided one way (by playing), but promotion another way (the table as-is, or whatever). The Championship must be played to a conclusion, as well as the Premier League, or the deal’s off.
I’m still trying to get my head around that. Norwich fans will naturally want to agree with him; fans of Leeds and others will want to disagree. I’m trying to be (at least a tad) objective.
It’s certainly an argument with merit, though. And while there are plans for a possible resumption of the Championship, it’s surely less likely than the Prem. Can we envisage all the paraphernalia, security, PPE and testing capability for the Prem being replicated for the Championship? I can’t.
Question-conclusion: If the Championship can’t be played to a conclusion, is Stuart Webber right that we shouldn’t accept three up-three down? And by the way, how the heck is the Championship going to determine the third promotion spot?
Meanwhile, City’s Todd Cantwell found himself quoted and pictured in much of the national press this week. The simplest formulation of an idea can sometimes be far more powerful than a 1000-word essay, and Todd’s tweet “We are people too” resonated across writers and pundits, as well as fans and his fellow-players.
His view isn’t universally shared, of course; nor is it the full story. But there may be good reason it resonated.
The government has joined the football authorities in pressing hard for a resumption, whatever stretching of rules and guidance it takes. Their rationale is that having football back on television will give a boost to the nation’s morale. (The nation appears to be more sensible, a poll showing that only 19% think it would give a morale boost – but this is the kind of idea that, like the virus, is hard to shake once it’s established.)
A few other players have put their heads above the parapet. If the Premier League resumes as proposed, and 20 of each club’s squad are involved in the remaining games, that’s 400 players in the closest of physical mixing. They have families to return to, as well as the rest of their professional and personal circles.
(Just an aside. If the black community were as well represented among ministers and administrators as it is among players, would there be quite the same keenness to press players back into action?)
Bread-and-circuses springs to mind.
Question-conclusion: As I write this, the government is trumpeting that ‘we’re past the peak’ and now only need to ‘stay alert’. Meanwhile, today has seen 3,200 new confirmed cases of Covid-19 in Britain and almost 500 deaths. Is it really safe to play games?
Actually … maybe there is a joined-up theme here after all.
Thank you Stewart for another excellent column; now everything is clear…or maybe not!
Given that I’ve just seen this accredited to the culture secretary:- “We all agreed that we will only go ahead if it is safe to do so and the health and welfare of players, coaches and staff comes first,” said Dowden…….
Let’s hope that the broadcasters also read it. At least we now know that the money aspect is irrelevant!! Cynical; moi……surely not.
For safety’s sake, surely 2019/20 has to be canned now and removed from the system. Otherwise give everybody a decent break and chance to regroup, and then restart in March next year, when we’ll have a much better understanding of exactly where this awful virus is taking us.
As DF said recently, if we lose one, just one life from restarting too early, then it’s a price which is not worth contemplating.
Keep well and stay safe.
O T B C
Thanks, John.
All parties are making sanctimonious noises about “only if it’s safe”. In most cases, I have to share your cynicism.
The point is that no-one knows. In which case, do you error on the side of caution, or of risk? I know where I lean.
Hi Stewart
A question my son asked me was if a player needs the physio on the pitch during a game how will that work full PPE.
If neither of the to leagues can resume to a completion why not have bottom 3 V top 3 in a mini league and sort it out 3 go to the premiership and 3 to the championship much last games and no one can complain.
It was sad to read in the Mail that some supporters have inferred that Brighton players may not have Cov-19 the club are just trying it on, as reported by Martin Samuels a few days ago.
If the leagues can’t resume how could you justify a mini league?!
The idea of a mini league could work as preseason games prior to the start of 20/21 and the fixtures would have to show TBC till the results were known
Just part of the story
It says something of the mistrust now rampant in the Premier League that when Brightonrevealed three positive tests for coronavirusthis week, the first reaction of many was to ask: ‘How did they conjure that?’
Expect more of the same now players are revealing their true feelings about Project Restart.
Yes, I fully expect that. Thanks
Good one Stew.
The money will talk, just like always, just like always.
However I do not want to see a single player from ANY club back in collective training, let alone actual game time, under these circumstances.
“Home advantage isn’t simply a question of having the majority of fans. Familiarity with the ground, facilities and pitch dimensions, ease of traveling and much else contributes to it”.
I could not have put that any better.
Two months [minimum] off, no genuine training and the risk of injury on return to contact situations multiplies intensively. I wouldn’t blame a single player from any club to give the whole concept the finger.
It’s time to end the season now and let the greedy b*stards pick over the bones later.
I’m not sure I want anything to do with the Premier League anymore.
Hi Stewart,
at the moment it’s hard to muster up any enthusiasm for the return of football. I would much rather see my mum in her care home. Haven’t been able to visit her since 5th March. The people shouting loudest for the return of football are by and large money oriented they don’t give a fig for the players safety or the integrity of the game. I don’t care what league we end up in when it’s safe and fair I will continue to support them.
Whatever we feel about football it isn’t worth one unavoidable death.
Hear, hear.
My mum is also in a care home (in Gorleston, so 125 miles from where I live these days). Happily, it’s very caring and well run. But she’s on my mind, as yours is for you.
One of the problems with all of this is that the government has scared the bejeezez out of us and we have complied far more than they had anticipated. Which now gives them a problem. When they say “raise the morale of the nation” I don’t think they are specifically to referring to football. I think it means normality and if people see it they may be more encouraged to venture out. Which is now what is required.
The point about 500 deaths is relevant, of course, but I venture to suggest that the day we last played, Sheffield United away, a lot people lost their lives that day too. But we don’t hear about that.
The players need to play. It will be a perfectly safe environment to do do. You can’t pass on what you don’t have and they will all be well tested.
And as for SW. I applaud him and agree 100%. Give us a chance and if we fail, then relegate us, fair enough. But the people taking our place must surely have to earn it rather than just be given it?
And I’m sorry if my reply is all over the place as well!
We’re all a bit confused by this! Silly to pretend we’re not.
Cheers
The tests have been returning around one in three false negatives, so with around 200 people in the ground (players, officials, medical staff, ground staff, tv workers, other press, and probably ball boys – well, the players aren’t going to go jumping barriers and searching for the ball among the rows of seats), that’s a possible 60 odd people who could be carrying the virus and not showing symptoms. Safe environment? I don’t think so.
500 deaths are irrelevant?!! 500.deaths.are.irrelevant.
500 DEATHS ARE IRRELEVANT – DP3 2020.
How many deaths are relevant, DP3?!
March 9th vs Sheffield united – 5th Coronavirus Death in the UK. 4000 globally ON TOP of usual numbers of deaths expected for that year. What is your point? That these don’t matter?
What the UK needs less than anything now is for people to ‘venture out’ unless you want to see one of these irrelevant deaths in your family or friendship group, mate. buckle up, because its about to get a hell of a lot worse.
Lots of love, a canaries fan safe and sound in New Zealand.
Tom, please, I did not say they are irrelevant.
You’re behaving like a Leeds or Liverpool fan, read the post properly.
As Europe opens up I think the mood is changing, and I think the games will go ahead unless there is a distinct downturn in virus numbers. The capacity of the human spirit to accept stuff is always surprising and the fear of mid-March has now become a kind of belligerent acceptance, even though not much has changed in that time; people are still dying all over the world; people are still being infected, yet apparently “life must go on” with a different set of rules and awareness.
As far as NCFC are concerned we will at least get the chance to save ourselves on the pitch, though I don’t hold out much hope that we will. As for Leeds, there is still plenty of time for them to choke again.