www.altyfans.co.uk
General Category => Altrincham FC First Team => Topic started by: HashtagAlty on August 08, 2020, 06:29:45 PM
-
According to Wrexham AGM
"The National League has recommended clubs not to sell season tickets for the 2020-21 season."
-
WREXHAM AFC held it's Annual General Meeting today via zoom and here are some of the main talking points.
* Seven people - Matthew Davies, Spencer Harris, Gavin Jones, James Kelly, Stephen Lloyd, Mark MacDougall and Matthew Scott - were all elected or re-elected to the board.
* The National League has recommended clubs not to sell season tickets for the 2020-21 season.
* Wrexham are not in a position to sell fans their usual seats but details will be retained for future seasons.
* The Racecourse capacity will be reduced to 2,600 because of the coronavirus.
* Wrexham are looking to introduce blocks of tickets initially - 10, 10 and 3 - and switch to season cards if restrictions are lifted.
* National League fixtures are set to be released on September 8.
* The season is due to start on October 3 but this could change.
* Wrexham will be required to appoint a Covid 19 Officer and Medical Officer.
* Return is done in 4 stages - return to training (no contact), return to close contact training, return to competition but no spectators (pre-season) and return to competition with safe return of spectators.
* No extra time or replays when Wrexham enter the FA Cup at 4th qualifying round stage - straight to penalties.
* Prize money in cup competitions set to be reduced.
* Wrexham boss Dean Keates will have a £969,313 budget for the upcoming season - it was £1,256,900 for Bryan Hughes in 2019-20.
https://www.leaderlive.co.uk/sport/18638223.happened-supporters-zoomed-wrexham-afc-annual-general-meeting/ (https://www.leaderlive.co.uk/sport/18638223.happened-supporters-zoomed-wrexham-afc-annual-general-meeting/)
-
Just hoping they don't make it seating only, if that does happen we are looking at less than 300 per game if its 25 % capacity.
-
* Wrexham boss Dean Keates will have a £969,313 budget for the upcoming season - it was £1,256,900 for Bryan Hughes in 2019-20.
Aside from the actual figures (about £18k a week) and whether they can afford it in current Covid environment) I’m startled at just how open they are with their budget there.
I mean it’s a very irregular thing to state it so openly? To the exact pound as well, not just circa £950k etc 🤷♂️
-
* Wrexham boss Dean Keates will have a £969,313 budget for the upcoming season - it was £1,256,900 for Bryan Hughes in 2019-20.
Aside from the actual figures (about £18k a week) and whether they can afford it in current Covid environment) I’m startled at just how open they are with their budget there.
I mean it’s a very irregular thing to state it so openly? To the exact pound as well, not just circa £950k etc 🤷♂️
Transparent because they’re run by a supporters trust mate, transparent and sh*t also
-
Mandatory season ticketing.
-
Worth remembering on specific restrictions at Wrexham they will be bound, of course, by the Welsh Government & their rules & regulations so they may have a slightly different approach in some areas to the other 23 clubs in the league. I think I’m right in saying that lockdown is still generally a bit stricter in Wales (and Scotland) than in England.
-
At the moment we aren't allowed to gather outdoors in large numbers because of the spike. No doubt any future spikes would have implications for sporting events so abandoning season tickets seems reasonable to me. Presumably the games would still go ahead in an empty stadium.
I also think it would be sensible to sell tickets valid for multiple unspecified matches if it would help with cash flow
-
Maybe if games are closed to spectators there could be the same sort of live streaming as we saw for the play offs, and you could buy and season ticket for that.
-
Maybe if games are closed to spectators there could be the same sort of live streaming as we saw for the play offs, and you could buy and season ticket for that.
Hopefully this might be an option if it comes to it , as long as most of the money goes to the clubs .Also if as expected away fans are banned it could come in handy.
-
No justification for away fans.
The clubs should be able to sell x% of capacity as season tickets.
Each ticket is owned by a person and is readily trackable as the club should retain used tickets.
How much safer is that than 500 random folk turning up.
-
I think no away fans myself is a bit blunt. It’s not like any away fans would be allowed to turn up & pay on the day either, they also would need a ticket be that directly from us or via their own club or it could be tickets for away fans only sold to away club Season Ticket holders so tracking their identities wouldn’t be very hard. It’s not like our home support all lives in Altrincham either. A small & limited number of all ticketed away fans segregated in the Hale End is viable I reckon but I would totally understand losing 1/4 of the ground capacity for 70 Sutton/Dover/Eastleigh fans economically might not make sense.
-
You've still got the issue of people buying season tickets and then being told sorry you've got to miss the next three matches. No offence but Brian Flynn and a videofeed isn't quite the same.
-
I am in Dubai this month and this is what they have done for the Fountain Show, which can attract maybe 2 - 3000 people on a weekend night all crammed together...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3qm4etOCrs
This sort of thing may be how it plays out as there is quite some evidence that singing is risky. Quite a few choir members caught Covid early.
Depressing thought really that we would have to stand like that for a game
-
Just been checking my lockdown notes and, according to official figures, there were 87 covid-19 deaths reported ("the highest yet") on March 24 just after the start of "lockdown". Last Tuesday, according to PHE stats, there were 89 deaths. Even if this number is correct (daily deaths are probably more like 30 by now, mostly elderly or unwell), if deaths continue to fall as they have been for months, deaths will be well below March 24 levels by October and thus there will no longer be any justification for limiting crowds at football matches - unless we're no longer allowed to take any risks, in which case we couldn't drive to the match anyway (let alone walk there across the golf course!), and a return to normality is what we should be pushing for before we end up with a load more cases like Droylsden and Belle Vue. If not by October, when? There may never be an effective vaccine for all we know. We do know that people develop immunity though - Spanish flu never went away, people just got immune.
-
People got immune from Spanish Flu following two more years of deaths, the second and third waves. By advocating the unlimited introduction of crowds you are setting up the ideal breeding grounds for the second wave. Come to the ground, sing and chant with your mates and then go home to give Grandad Covid.
The reason the death rate is getting down to where it was in March is preciseley because we are taking such drastic social distancing measures. Without them, or if we choose to ignore them we will very quickly be back to where we were. Hence the current enhanced social distancing that Greater Manchester is currently lumbered with.
-
I have been working since the start of the "Pandemic" indoors in a relatively crowded environment despite being at relatively high risk (no one where I work has caught it)
With our supporters outside and with intelligent controls throughout the stadium I really don't see an issue as long as fans behave sensibly.
With about 0.025% of the population with the virus I think the risks (certainly to healthy ppl - those high risk like me - overweight, getting on a bit, diabetic - do need protection) are extremely over exaggerated.
If fans don't want to take the risk then no one is forcing them!
-
Look, the lockdown was supposed to be about stopping the nhs being overwhelmed (imposed, by the way, after infections had peaked), not taking away lots of our rights indefinitely. The NHS is not being overwhelmed, deaths are below a 5 year average for the time of year. Look at New Zealand, they imposed a lockdown for 4 c.v. cases (not even deaths), lots of the stuff going on is obviously nuts!I repeat, how long do you want this to go on for? Months? years? until there is no risk? It sounds like you want a year or two at least (by which time there will not be much professional sport, or jobs, left - and no money to pay for the nhs). You want to talk about Grandad? He died before Kidderminster away, having fought bravely in ww2. And I haven't seen Grandma since lockdown. But we should also talk about the over 100,000 children who are predicted to starve to death worldwide this year alone because of government lockdowns, compared to the tiny number of children who die from this virus - 3 aged 5-14 in the UK last I heard - quite a contrast - and the millions who will die in the third world because of lockdowns, and the wars and extreme governments that will inevitably result - this could easily end up like the 1930's! We are being asked to sacrifice children's lives for the supposed protection of adults, not something I could ever feel comfortable with. Crashing the economy kills quite a lot of people as well. Scaring people away from getting vital treatment at hospital kills people. Non-covid lives matter, and there is evidence that some of these lockdown measures have done more harm than good. Just to be clear - do you want non-attendance or, say, a 25% capacity at ML until there is a vaccine, or permanently otherwise? It also needs pointing out that things were quite a lot different in 1918 - the aftermath of a catastrophic war, medical advances since then etc. Professor Pantsdown's flawed computer model predicting over half a million was never going to be anywhere near the truth - and I understand he was involved in the foot and mouth debacle as well involving the unnecessary slaughter of millions of healthy livestock "just in case" - lucky he didn't recommend that for us humans. And Sweden's more limited measures was supposed to result in a catastrophically higher death rate - never happened! Less than Scotland and Finland (I understand), marginally higher than Denmark, substantially higher than Norway, which also just happens to have a substantially higher population over 65.
Half a million deaths would have implied Spanish flu level deaths for over a year - but there has been no sign of this anywhere in the world regardless of measures taken, so far as I am aware. And infections were already falling by March 23rd which suggests that further measures were unnecessary.
And the point is, when South Shields played FC United on 14th of March, I understand there were 14 deaths from Covid-19 - and matches were not officially banned for some days after that. So if we get down to those levels by October, why shouldn't we have 3,000 in Moss Lane? Seriously, what is the difference, if it was alright then? And where in the world is there any sign of this famous second wave? (And I don't mean increased infection whilst hospitalizations continue to fall, or first waves coming late in the day). Answers on a postcard please...
And, haven't we had ideal breeding grounds in shops for months? All those people going in, touching things, standing in the middle of the aisle on their phone so that people inevitably pass close to them etc. etc.
Or I know, why don't we compromise? Reserve half the ground, say, for lockdown zealots (also known as bedwetters etc.) - say 962 places at 25% capacity, and have 3850 of us in the rest of the ground. We could even increase it to 2/3 of the ground for those particularly vulnerable to this virus if there is the demand for it (1283 places, and 2566 places for the rest of us). I dare say you people love segregation, and after all it would be just like Portsmouth which had special tickets for a singing section.
Oh, and another thing. Don't panic! Do not panic, mister Mainwaring. There's a bug on the loose. Fix bayonets. They don't like it up'em, they do not like it up'em! CHARGE!
Sorry, but you're the one who implied I'm killing Grandad - and me recently bereaved and all. Certainly I think we should protect care homes, the vulnerable, disabled etc. and it was a disgrace that infectious people out of hospital were sent into care homes, throwing care homes under the bus to "protect the NHS" ( aren't the NHS supposed to protect us?) - if anyone deserves criticism, perhaps it is the people behind this. And by the way, Grandma is in a care home, so I'm absolutely fuming about what has happened. These viruses, though, as I say, tend to become less virulent over time, and, as I say, I am quite happy to reserve a section of the ground for those who feel particularly vulnerable, in the same way as I would advocate specific times to shop for those who don't want to wear face nappies.
-
You are Bolsonaro and ICMFP! 😉
-
At the end of the day people who wish to go to the grounds will go and those who are worried about COVID wont bother.
Personally I’m not sure what I would do just now. What is a fact is, if everyone doesn’t accept the risks and congregate in big groups thinking “I am young and fit enough to survive Covid” so f**k it then the second wave will happen, particularly through the Winter months.
I’m not saying all young people act irresponsibly, far from it, neither am I saying all Older people take the necessary care, but generally to me, that seems the way of the world.
It’s a nasty virus folks. Take care..
-
Look, the lockdown was supposed to be about stopping the nhs being overwhelmed (imposed, by the way, after infections had peaked), not taking away lots of our rights indefinitely. The NHS is not being overwhelmed, deaths are below a 5 year average for the time of year. Look at New Zealand, they imposed a lockdown for 4 c.v. cases (not even deaths), lots of the stuff going on is obviously nuts!I repeat, how long do you want this to go on for? Months? years? until there is no risk? It sounds like you want a year or two at least (by which time there will not be much professional sport, or jobs, left - and no money to pay for the nhs). You want to talk about Grandad? He died before Kidderminster away, having fought bravely in ww2. And I haven't seen Grandma since lockdown. But we should also talk about the over 100,000 children who are predicted to starve to death worldwide this year alone because of government lockdowns, compared to the tiny number of children who die from this virus - 3 aged 5-14 in the UK last I heard - quite a contrast - and the millions who will die in the third world because of lockdowns, and the wars and extreme governments that will inevitably result - this could easily end up like the 1930's! We are being asked to sacrifice children's lives for the supposed protection of adults, not something I could ever feel comfortable with. Crashing the economy kills quite a lot of people as well. Scaring people away from getting vital treatment at hospital kills people. Non-covid lives matter, and there is evidence that some of these lockdown measures have done more harm than good. Just to be clear - do you want non-attendance or, say, a 25% capacity at ML until there is a vaccine, or permanently otherwise? It also needs pointing out that things were quite a lot different in 1918 - the aftermath of a catastrophic war, medical advances since then etc. Professor Pantsdown's flawed computer model predicting over half a million was never going to be anywhere near the truth - and I understand he was involved in the foot and mouth debacle as well involving the unnecessary slaughter of millions of healthy livestock "just in case" - lucky he didn't recommend that for us humans. And Sweden's more limited measures was supposed to result in a catastrophically higher death rate - never happened! Less than Scotland and Finland (I understand), marginally higher than Denmark, substantially higher than Norway, which also just happens to have a substantially higher population over 65.
Half a million deaths would have implied Spanish flu level deaths for over a year - but there has been no sign of this anywhere in the world regardless of measures taken, so far as I am aware. And infections were already falling by March 23rd which suggests that further measures were unnecessary.
And the point is, when South Shields played FC United on 14th of March, I understand there were 14 deaths from Covid-19 - and matches were not officially banned for some days after that. So if we get down to those levels by October, why shouldn't we have 3,000 in Moss Lane? Seriously, what is the difference, if it was alright then? And where in the world is there any sign of this famous second wave? (And I don't mean increased infection whilst hospitalizations continue to fall, or first waves coming late in the day). Answers on a postcard please...
And, haven't we had ideal breeding grounds in shops for months? All those people going in, touching things, standing in the middle of the aisle on their phone so that people inevitably pass close to them etc. etc.
Or I know, why don't we compromise? Reserve half the ground, say, for lockdown zealots (also known as bedwetters etc.) - say 962 places at 25% capacity, and have 3850 of us in the rest of the ground. We could even increase it to 2/3 of the ground for those particularly vulnerable to this virus if there is the demand for it (1283 places, and 2566 places for the rest of us). I dare say you people love segregation, and after all it would be just like Portsmouth which had special tickets for a singing section.
Oh, and another thing. Don't panic! Do not panic, mister Mainwaring. There's a bug on the loose. Fix bayonets. They don't like it up'em, they do not like it up'em! CHARGE!
Sorry, but you're the one who implied I'm killing Grandad - and me recently bereaved and all. Certainly I think we should protect care homes, the vulnerable, disabled etc. and it was a disgrace that infectious people out of hospital were sent into care homes, throwing care homes under the bus to "protect the NHS" ( aren't the NHS supposed to protect us?) - if anyone deserves criticism, perhaps it is the people behind this. And by the way, Grandma is in a care home, so I'm absolutely fuming about what has happened. These viruses, though, as I say, tend to become less virulent over time, and, as I say, I am quite happy to reserve a section of the ground for those who feel particularly vulnerable, in the same way as I would advocate specific times to shop for those who don't want to wear face nappies.
Yes
-
To Hugh, interesting synopsis. I do the books for a care home locally and let me tell you that care home residents are still being sent back WITHOUT a Covid test (or at least nothing mentioned on their discharged notes) As recently as yesterday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SBL
-
If this turns out to be true then I would speculate it could be to down cash flow reasons and trying to stop clubs going bust en masse by limiting them to spending only what they generate on match days.
Consider the scenario where the season starts as intended and clubs sell season tickets. Clubs then spend the season ticket revenue securing players, signing contracts etc to the point that the money is spent. The season starts but then has to stop due to a resurgent number of cases.
If we end up with a repeat of this season then clubs could be in the position of having to refund a large proportion of season tickets money. This could create major cash flow issues and could lead to administrations and the like.
Now this is just me speculating and like others have said could create a whole host of other virus related issues that a lack of season tickets generates such as reduced ability to track and trace.
One thing is for certain is that it must be giving The board a major headache.
-
Bolsonaro? I just read that Brazil has a lower death rate than the UK!
Love it - political weather, a political free trade club and now a political virus!
Oh and, we are now officially in recession with an economic contraction of 20.4% in the last quarter (twenty point four per cent as the vidiprinter would have said), compared to an 8.6% contraction for Sweden, which has a broadly similar (or lower) death rate to the UK. So doing some rudimentary maths, that is over 150 billion pounds thrown away in one quarter alone (makes Gordon Brown's selling off of the gold reserves at record low prices look cheap). Much of this we will never get back, which could have been avoided without the March panic measures. How many lives are lost again for every billion pounds of cuts?
And over 5,000 was taken off the official covid-19 deaths today - down to about 41,000, which is still probably overstated, so say about 30,000 covid-19 deaths, and half of them (or more) would probably have died this year anyway (hence below five-year-average deaths for the time of year for several weeks in a row now), so maybe 15,000 excess deaths for this year (if deaths continue to fall - and we seem to be approaching herd immunity). And how many would it have been if we'd continued with the pre-lockdown plan, or just had a bare minimum of precautions? twice as many (30,000)? 10 times as many (150,0000)? Still a long way short of half a million. Actually there may be an answer to this. Apparently orthodox Jews in Israel are ignoring government advice about social distancing and getting away with it, due to the relevant politics, culture and religion in Israel. Watch that space... (And by the way, there is a deafening silence from the government on nutritional solutions to this, no, they'll listen to their mates in big pharma all the way). For extraordinary measures depriving us of so many liberties there should be extraordinary proof and clear and robust procedures (so not an overnight announcement on Twitter, for example). And as herd immunity approaches, and deaths continue to fall, with no sign of second waves, start with 25% capacity in October if you like (and we must do this as a minimum) and work up to full capacity through the season.
I genuinely would be interested to know what it would take for lockdown zealots to accept a crowd of 7000 at ML for, say, a playoff against Stockport - or is our real new capacity 1925 if no effective vaccine becomes available? And don't forget, if half the economy goes, the nhs is severely compromised and saves far less lives. The bedwetting really does need to stop before it's too late to save the country (not to mention millions of third world lives). Honestly, we just can't afford to go on throwing hundreds of billions of pounds away, whatever fears some people may have - get them counselling or something. Project fear (mark 3) will be the ruin of us.
And I should add, non-UK lives matter. It is probably only a slight exaggeration to say that there are plenty of people who would gloss over a million deaths in the third world if it was saving a thousand lives in Britain. And be under no illusion, that is what we are facing, millions of people dying in the third world because of the various lockdowns around the world, the poorest worst affected as usual.
Of course there is miscounting. Lies, damn lies and covid statistics. And not least miscounting in England (probably Scotland too). Total deaths are usually fairly accurate though (and I repeat, total UK deaths are below the five year average for the time of year yet again). Frankly I'm not bothered about the politics of Bolsonaro or Sweden's government, just stopping this disaster getting any worse than it is already, and learning any lessons we can from around the world.
Nb, I edited this after reading Back Road's reply
Oh, and according to Professor Heneghan, there would be 15 covid deaths reported this Wednesday, and 11 on Tuesday under the new, non-dodgy system. Summer flu has been killing more people for some weeks now. It's an emergency, I'll get right on it. Keep looking for that second wave
-
Bolsonaro? I just read that Brazil has a lower death rate than the UK!
Love it - political weather, a political free trade club and now a political virus!
Depends how each nation is counting. Bolsanaro is a clown, regardless.
-
Bolsonaro? I just read that Brazil has a lower death rate than the UK!
Love it - political weather, a political free trade club and now a political virus!
Oh and, we are now officially in recession with an economic contraction of 20.4% in the last quarter (twenty point four per cent as the vidiprinter would have said), compared to an 8.6% contraction for Sweden, which has a broadly similar (or lower) death rate to the UK. So doing some rudimentary maths, that is over 150 billion pounds thrown away in one quarter alone (makes Gordon Brown's selling off of the gold reserves at record low prices look cheap). Much of this we will never get back, which could have been avoided without the March panic measures. How many lives are lost again for every billion pounds of cuts?
And over 5,000 was taken off the official covid-19 deaths today - down to about 41,000, which is still probably overstated, so say about 30,000 covid-19 deaths, and half of them (or more) would probably have died this year anyway (hence below five-year-average deaths for the time of year for several weeks in a row now), so maybe 15,000 excess deaths for this year (if deaths continue to fall - and we seem to be approaching herd immunity). And how many would it have been if we'd continued with the pre-lockdown plan, or just had a bare minimum of precautions? twice as many (30,000)? 10 times as many (150,0000)? Still a long way short of half a million. Actually there may be an answer to this. Apparently orthodox Jews in Israel are ignoring government advice about social distancing and getting away with it, due to the relevant politics, culture and religion in Israel. Watch that space... (And by the way, there is a deafening silence from the government on nutritional solutions to this, no, they'll listen to their mates in big pharma all the way). For extraordinary measures depriving us of so many liberties there should be extraordinary proof and clear and robust procedures (so not an overnight announcement on Twitter, for example). And as herd immunity approaches, and deaths continue to fall, with no sign of second waves, start with 25% capacity in October if you like (and we must do this as a minimum) and work up to full capacity through the season.
I genuinely would be interested to know what it would take for lockdown zealots to accept a crowd of 7000 at ML for, say, a playoff against Stockport - or is our real new capacity 1925 if no effective vaccine becomes available? And don't forget, if half the economy goes, the nhs is severely compromised and saves far less lives. The bedwetting really does need to stop before it's too late to save the country (not to mention millions of third world lives). Honestly, we just can't afford to go on throwing hundreds of billions of pounds away, whatever fears some people may have - get them counselling or something. Project fear (mark 3) will be the ruin of us.
And I should add, non-UK lives matter. It is probably only a slight exaggeration to say that there are plenty of people who would gloss over a million deaths in the third world if it was saving a thousand lives in Britain. And be under no illusion, that is what we are facing, millions of people dying in the third world because of the various lockdowns around the world, the poorest worst affected as usual.
Of course there is miscounting. Lies, damn lies and covid statistics. And not least miscounting in England (probably Scotland too). Total deaths are usually fairly accurate though (and I repeat, total UK deaths are below the five year average for the time of year yet again). Frankly I'm not bothered about the politics of Bolsonaro or Sweden's government, just stopping this disaster getting any worse than it is already, and learning any lessons we can from around the world.
Nb, I edited this after reading Back Road's reply
Oh, and according to Professor Heneghan, there would be 15 covid deaths reported this Wednesday, and 11 on Tuesday under the new, non-dodgy system. Summer flu has been killing more people for some weeks now. It's an emergency, I'll get right on it. Keep looking for that second wave
Excellent post.
A couple of things:
You can safely say death and case rates in Scotland have been massaged one way or the other; you know when Sturgeon is lying - her lips are moving!
the fact that the death rate is currently below the seasonal average suggests that people who would have been dying now died between Feb and May. The virus only accelerated the deaths of some old and infirm, but the amount of accelerated deaths we will get in the next few months scares me as the amount missing essential treatments is scary and - if you account for the estimated deaths from suicide from the last recession was estimated at 10k and this recession will be significantly worse - I hate to think of the increased rate of suicides with SANE reporting an increase in 200% seeking help.
Sport is a great release for many people from the stresses of everyday life - as a participant or spectator - so it's value to people can be immense.
-
Maybe we should leave the pub theories in the pub?
-
Rocky, never mind about pub theories, just keep looking at the facts, the real bottom line.
The usual suspects said Sweden's more limited approach would be a disaster so I kept an eye on their death rate (from official sources) - and guess what happened?
When people started playing the economy over people's lives nonsense, I said that crashing the economy kills quite a lot of people - guess what's happening?
Open your flipping eyes man, this is serious stuff, that's why I'm bothered about this.
Oh what's the use, go on believing the lies if you want to. It's like someone said, it's no use trying to argue with some people.
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
JD, I remember Darren (the Darren who likes to start the chants on the Golf Road sometimes) confided that watching this club was his release when he had been going through a really stressful time (no details as it's private stuff). What will people like him do now? The sum total of nothing in recent times, seemingly, and I really worry about the effects all this will have.
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Nb, the average daily deaths from this virus appear to be about 15 at the moment (not pub theory, fact - like I say, open your eyes man). reportedly several times lower than the combined deaths from flu and pneumonia at this time (do your own research if you like - I can believe it though). I repeat - "it's an emergency, I'll get right on it". (Name the film!)
Also worth noting: Reportedly (and it certainly rings true) the average age of deaths from covid-19 worldwide is 81, the average comorbidities are 2.5 - if you are young and healthy, there is a negligible chance of dying from it. (Again, do your own research - and preferably before spouting the pub theories crap, it's not really patriotism that's the last refuge of the scoundrel, it's ad hominems)
ps lies are actually pretty much what we're getting - newspapers talking about an increase in cases rather than an increase in positive test results (with false positives and negatives being an issue as only a tiny percentage of the population are infected), and with a lot of positive test results relating to people who are asymptomatic anyway, and newspapers failing to add that an increase in positive test results just happened to coincide with an increase in testing and that there has been no corresponding increase in hospitalizations (all facts, do your research, man, or else don't sound off)- lies by omission, to create a better story I suppose... (and you can have that last bit about a better story for your "pub theories" if you want!). This might reasonably be described as lies by omission. And as for the people who came up with a system of recording deaths that never allowed for people recovering from covid-19 and then dying of something else - or did the big news about the official deaths being reduced by over 5,000 pass you by? As for the excess deaths, well we'll see how many more deaths there are this year than last year. Do you want to have a bet on it - you seem to believe the 46,000 figure, that large numbers are still dying, that many more will die from it this winter - very well, twenty quid on it - you want to believe that there will be 15,000 more deaths this year, or 50,000 or 60,000, put your money where your mouth is, and I'll pay you at the next match we're at (if we ever get to go to a match again) after the figures are released, or give it to someone to pass on to you.
On second thoughts, let's make it interesting. You're a bank manager or something (last I heard), and it's not a problem to me. Let's say 200 pounds. If you're up for it of course, and no pressure or anything. And we can iron out the rules and decide on a referee if you are.And If I still have any money left by next year. Like I say, this government is bankrupting the country.
-
You’ve no idea what my private theories are as I don’t share them online...take the hint
For what it is worth I've never been a Bank manager.
-
Hugh, you might find http://www.altyfans.co.uk/index.php?board=1.0 (http://www.altyfans.co.uk/index.php?board=1.0) useful
-
John Mcaliskey's behind it all, mark my words.
I know this forum's always been a bit crackers, but people offering monetary bets on death rates takes it to the next level.
-
John Mcaliskey's behind it all, mark my words.
I know this forum's always been a bit crackers, but people offering monetary bets on death rates takes it to the next level.
I think we've actually skipped two or three levels.
-
John Mcaliskey's behind it all, mark my words.
As in the lad we had a few years ago?
Did he start all this off!
-
John Mcaliskey's behind it all, mark my words.
As in the lad we had a few years ago?
Did he start all this off!
Either him or Fabio Bassangue, I reckon.
-
I Just think it’s great people are engaging with the forum once more
-
The point is though, when can we have crowds again at Moss Lane? That's what we all want to know. Any ideas, or is it pointless trying to guess with the capriciousness (among other things) of this government (lucky I didn't go to France)? Are we still on for crowds back in October? Are the postponed crowd trials still happening? I see they have a crowd for the snooker final (apparently Ronnie was against it) so presumably some sort of trials are happening. Until and unless clear conditions are laid out for a return to crowds, all we can do is guess.
-
I don't mind wearing a mask throughout the game, which may be made mandatory first. If so and providing there isn't another spike before then, it may be the actual start date of the weekend of 3rd October. They can always delay it further, or with the number restrictions, by also making big games such as the Derbies all-ticket plus season ticket holders only. No objections to no away fans also at first, after all it will be the same for all teams in the league. That way, we should be able to cover all the games. TV will also help.
-
Rocky, never mind about pub theories, just keep looking at the facts, the real bottom line.
The usual suspects said Sweden's more limited approach would be a disaster so I kept an eye on their death rate (from official sources) - and guess what happened?
When people started playing the economy over people's lives nonsense, I said that crashing the economy kills quite a lot of people - guess what's happening?
Open your flipping eyes man, this is serious stuff, that's why I'm bothered about this.
Oh what's the use, go on believing the lies if you want to. It's like someone said, it's no use trying to argue with some people.
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
JD, I remember Darren (the Darren who likes to start the chants on the Golf Road sometimes) confided that watching this club was his release when he had been going through a really stressful time (no details as it's private stuff). What will people like him do now? The sum total of nothing in recent times, seemingly, and I really worry about the effects all this will have.
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Nb, the average daily deaths from this virus appear to be about 15 at the moment (not pub theory, fact - like I say, open your eyes man). reportedly several times lower than the combined deaths from flu and pneumonia at this time (do your own research if you like - I can believe it though). I repeat - "it's an emergency, I'll get right on it". (Name the film!)
Also worth noting: Reportedly (and it certainly rings true) the average age of deaths from covid-19 worldwide is 81, the average comorbidities are 2.5 - if you are young and healthy, there is a negligible chance of dying from it. (Again, do your own research - and preferably before spouting the pub theories crap, it's not really patriotism that's the last refuge of the scoundrel, it's ad hominems)
ps lies are actually pretty much what we're getting - newspapers talking about an increase in cases rather than an increase in positive test results (with false positives and negatives being an issue as only a tiny percentage of the population are infected), and with a lot of positive test results relating to people who are asymptomatic anyway, and newspapers failing to add that an increase in positive test results just happened to coincide with an increase in testing and that there has been no corresponding increase in hospitalizations (all facts, do your research, man, or else don't sound off)- lies by omission, to create a better story I suppose... (and you can have that last bit about a better story for your "pub theories" if you want!). This might reasonably be described as lies by omission. And as for the people who came up with a system of recording deaths that never allowed for people recovering from covid-19 and then dying of something else - or did the big news about the official deaths being reduced by over 5,000 pass you by? As for the excess deaths, well we'll see how many more deaths there are this year than last year. Do you want to have a bet on it - you seem to believe the 46,000 figure, that large numbers are still dying, that many more will die from it this winter - very well, twenty quid on it - you want to believe that there will be 15,000 more deaths this year, or 50,000 or 60,000, put your money where your mouth is, and I'll pay you at the next match we're at (if we ever get to go to a match again) after the figures are released, or give it to someone to pass on to you.
On second thoughts, let's make it interesting. You're a bank manager or something (last I heard), and it's not a problem to me. Let's say 200 pounds. If you're up for it of course, and no pressure or anything. And we can iron out the rules and decide on a referee if you are.And If I still have any money left by next year. Like I say, this government is bankrupting the country.
It is good to see someone else who has looked at facts beyond the mainstream media and the government. I find the Coronaphobia and hysteria appalling and dangerous.
-
Don't start the season until it's deemed 'safe' for anyone wanting to go the match, to do so. What's the point? Closed doors/ 20% capacity defeats the whole object of a football club. And I can't see how it would help financially.
I know the 'deemed safe' bit is contentious, I'm not getting into that. Hopefully it will happen before 3rd Oct. Just don't play football with nobody there.
While the Pools Panel decides A-level results... King's Lynn did not win the league.
-
We've been operating at less than 20% capacity for a heck of a while. Even before the increased rating it has been rare for our average gate to be more than that (I. E. Over 1200 odd). The new rating means that now rises to over 1500? So no away fans perhaps and we'd be fine.
-
We've been operating at less than 20% capacity for a heck of a while. Even before the increased rating it has been rare for our average gate to be more than that (I. E. Over 1200 odd). The new rating means that now rises to over 1500? So no away fans perhaps and we'd be fine.
So no away fans perhaps and we'd be fine.
100% agreement with no away fans. Not to start with.
-
Personally I'd be perfectly happy if we could stream games via Alty TV on a pay-per-view basis. I don't see me risking away matches this side of Christmas.
-
Personally I'd be perfectly happy if we could stream games via Alty TV on a pay-per-view basis. I don't see me risking away matches this side of Christmas.
Totally agree even at £10 per game but at the moment it cant be between 3pm and 5.30pm on a Saturday
-
If the National League want to do their members a favour (and this is the other burning question) perhaps they could save as many of the bigger matches as possible (the likes of Alty v Stockport for a start) until later in the season when hopefully things will be somewhat back to normal. Any chance of that?
And of course, I agree with JD - coronaphobia is dangerous! Daily deaths appear to be about 11 now (less than 1% of all deaths), the collateral of these restrictions is horrendous, and what exactly is the exit strategy - does anyone know? Even Graham Brady can't get an answer from these people!
Sorry all, but I suspect it is unrealistic to expect no comment on the lockdown at the moment... give us our football and our rights back and I'll never mention it again!
-
If the National League want to do their members a favour (and this is the other burning question) perhaps they could save as many of the bigger matches as possible (the likes of Alty v Stockport for a start) until later in the season when hopefully things will be somewhat back to normal. Any chance of that?
I was wondering about that too, and it does seem a good idea, but the increased number of midweek matches could make it impractical, as they are usually early in the season.
-
We've been operating at less than 20% capacity for a heck of a while. Even before the increased rating it has been rare for our average gate to be more than that (I. E. Over 1200 odd). The new rating means that now rises to over 1500? So no away fans perhaps and we'd be fine.
Good point. Admit I hadn't thought of it that way So, if 20% means anyone who wants to go the match can do so then great, let's go...
re away fans. We are in the Greater Manchester special measures zone so no bugger from elsewhere can come anyway. Only County would be able to bring fans.
(I'm aware of the contradiction between the above two statements. One is daft).
-
We've been operating at less than 20% capacity for a heck of a while. Even before the increased rating it has been rare for our average gate to be more than that (I. E. Over 1200 odd). The new rating means that now rises to over 1500? So no away fans perhaps and we'd be fine.
Good point. Admit I hadn't thought of it that way So, if 20% means anyone who wants to go the match can do so then great, let's go...
re away fans. We are in the Greater Manchester special measures zone so no bugger from elsewhere can come anyway. Only County would be able to bring fans.
(I'm aware of the contradiction between the above two statements. One is daft).
At present...
Move on to the start of the season and, frankly, nobody knows who or where will have restrictions.
-
daily c.v. deaths under 10/day average for the last 7 days, and if current trends continue, it will be frankly farsical if these restrictions are not eased by October 3rd. Here's hoping...
Admittedly, Stockport, Wrexham etc. later in the season might mean some midweek trips down South early doors, but hey, you can't have everything. A restricted capacity against Stockport might mean 50 or more off our average attendance for the season just from that one match, especially if they're going well again.
-
daily c.v. deaths under 10/day average for the last 7 days, and if current trends continue, it will be frankly farsical if these restrictions are not eased by October 3rd. Here's hoping...
Admittedly, Stockport, Wrexham etc. later in the season might mean some midweek trips down South early doors, but hey, you can't have everything. A restricted capacity against Stockport might mean 50 or more off our average attendance for the season just from that one match, especially if they're going well again.
Just so long as we don't get as paranoid as New Zealand!
-
And then there's Melbourne... It's quite frightening some of the stuff that's happening. If we don't stand up for our rights I fear we could lose some of them for the longterm.
-
And then there's Melbourne... It's quite frightening some of the stuff that's happening. If we don't stand up for our rights I fear we could lose some of them for the longterm.
Nah. We'll have increased responsibilities. How many used to wash hands before going out? Small stuff. Important stuff.
-
And then there's Melbourne... It's quite frightening some of the stuff that's happening. If we don't stand up for our rights I fear we could lose some of them for the longterm.
Nah. We'll have increased responsibilities. How many used to wash hands before going out? Small stuff. Important stuff.
Do you mean there are people who didn't?
-
And then there's Melbourne... It's quite frightening some of the stuff that's happening. If we don't stand up for our rights I fear we could lose some of them for the longterm.
Nah. We'll have increased responsibilities. How many used to wash hands before going out? Small stuff. Important stuff.
Do you mean there are people who didn't?
Yup.