The Club's recommendation on face coverings

I saw little evidence at the West Brom and Franchise games of my fellow supporters using the hand gel provided after touching the card reading units and the turnstiles. Rather similar to people going in and out of shops not using the gel provided. Sadly people have become complacent.

As an aside in the not socially distanced and not masked queue going into the Main Stand we had 2 security checks. One with the wand where the mask wearing operative comes extremely close and the second a pat down including close examination of coat collars etc. Not happy with those at all time for common sense.
 
What about the fact that many aren't adhering to the requirement to wear a mask?

Up until now, wearing a mask in stadiums at Euro 2020 has been mandatory, and UEFA officials in the stadium are supposed to remind fans of the rules. But many people in the arena still fail to follow them.

What consequences does this have? "Masks are not perfect," says Schaffner. "But they do provide some protection if everybody is yelling around you at a soccer game."

An as-yet unpublished study seen by DW suggests the same. According to the RWI Leibniz Institute for Economic Research and the SDU University of Southern Denmark in Sonderborg, Bundesliga matches with large crowds led to a significant increase in new infections. This was particularly the case when masks only had to be worn on the way to stadium seats, but not in the fan block.

This makes it all the more incomprehensible to many that mask rules for the last four European Championship matches in London have been relaxed in precisely this way: Since June 27, the UEFA website has said that if you are sitting in your seat at Wembley Stadium, you can remove your face covering. This has to do with the fact that the games are part of a study on the conduct of events. More information about the study can be found in this UK government document.

https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-ho...-contracting-covid-19-in-a-stadium/a-58092284
 
Neil Dawson said:
What a load of crap! The government follow medical advice. If the government didn’t want masks we’d never have had them. We had them for the periods scientists recommended them (once they had reversed their initial expertise that they didn’t work) and now haven’t got them because they don’t see the need.

Its also not just mine or anyone I knows opinion, loads and loads written about it once the decision was taken that they aren’t necessary any more. Remember we are talking about an outside event here. Have you seen the stats for Covid caught in the open air outside?
Click to expand...

If you're interested in learning something check out the pandemic thread where you will see much disagreement between the government and the scientific community. A quick Google turns up this fairly recent article.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-55680305

"But they worry about areas that are not just crowded but also partly enclosed, such as market stalls or bus shelters.

Whenever the air is still, it can become stagnant and contaminate

It's in environments like narrow pathways or busy queues that government advisers say face coverings may be needed"

*One study found that two men in China talking face-to-face for at least 15 minutes was enough to spread the virus."

How about a few thousand packed shoulder to shoulder shouting for 2 and a half hours in a stand with a roof and 3 walls?
 
RobWells said:
I'm sure its been said before, but why would people who are concerned about covid and/or others wearing (or not wearing) masks put themselves at risk by going to events like a footy match with a full crowd?!
Click to expand...
Thats a fair point but the counter argument is that people who might want to go but can't because of others.

See I'm offering a blanced view!
 
RobWells said:
I'm sure its been said before, but why would people who are concerned about covid and/or others wearing (or not wearing) masks put themselves at risk by going to events like a footy match with a full crowd?!
Click to expand...

It's a fair point but back in May you'd be expecting to attend via lottery a socially distanced game, if any. You will have had assurances from the club that they will introduce sensible measures.

You see on Thursday that they're asking fans to do the right things so you decide to go and see no hand cleansing, no masks, no effort from staff or fans.

In the first instance I'd like to see the club take some social responsibility for not actively propagating Covid and in the absence of being able to trust your fellow fan should at least allow you to refund on a per game basis.
 
RobWells said:
the firky shed has its own covid protection. all the dirty, virusey people (ie lager drinkers) are shamed out of being in there - therefore no covid was present
Click to expand...

Lucky "virusey" people I say, spared being boored to death. Remember, Black Label Life's Matter.

Copyright, Brian@Cornwall : )
 
I'm not particularly blaming the govt, but its become very obvious (as if we didnt know already) that people are very sheepy and love to follow clear & clearly evidence proven orders "from above". We are now in a strange place where no-one really knows what is best and/or worth doing, and people are doing their own thing. which is hardly ever the best thing.
 
Turkued said:
It must be sad going through life so confused about reality that you need to invent history and wallow in the dark world of conspiracy fantasies while calling others "idiots". I guess some need to compensate for certain physical deficiencies.

If anyone is looking for some real FFP3, better than FFP2, respirators to wear (they are hard to find) put the words "dental sky" in Google. I spent 5 weeks in a COVID ward, saw a bunch of people die, tried it myself but came back to life...you can't get better protection than these 3M's. They are also a lot more comfortable than cheap cloth masks that, as noted, don't offer all that much protection. We have an older fan base and I'd really like to see everyone there for the promotion parade! Be it in 2022 or 2042.
Click to expand...

When you died what did you see? If you saw nothing and have come back to spread caution and support the oppression of humanity and the sacrifice of living a normal life in a worse world knowing there is nothing after then that is as cruel as Lucifer, and someone with a near death experience should really appreciate that more rather than just looking at it so blinded for the sake of possibly living a bit longer which is no guarantee

Life is far more complicated than just about breathing or living to a grand old age, you can be a vegetable and still be breathing but that's not life is it nor is being past your time and not in control of yourself or locked away in a home.

Perhaps you were bought back just to make the same mistakes again and die and not learn anything because that is the complexity of life and death.
 
RobWells said:
I'm not particularly blaming the govt, but its become very obvious (as if we didnt know already) that people are very sheepy and love to follow clear & clearly evidence proven orders "from above". We are now in a strange place where no-one really knows what is best and/or worth doing, and people are doing their own thing. which is hardly ever the best thing.
Click to expand...

You have experts that say mask are effective but then You have experts that say they are useless. I no longer watch the news or any media and just live my life and am far happier for it UTCIAD
 
Having never recommended them before (because over a dozen randomised controlled trials show them ineffective), in June '20 The WHO changed their position. Deborah Cohen (BBC) asked at the press conference if they'd been politically lobbied to do so and they made no comment. I think we can assume from the silence that they were.

In the face of no new evidence coming to light regarding face coverings, why do you suppose lobbyists were keen to get The WHO to change their long held stance?
 
stuseddon said:
Having never recommended them before (because over a dozen randomised controlled trials show them ineffective), in June '20 The WHO changed their position. Deborah Cohen (BBC) asked at the press conference if they'd been politically lobbied to do so and they made no comment. I think we can assume from the silence that they were.

In the face of no new evidence coming to light regarding face coverings, why do you suppose lobbyists were keen to get The WHO to change their long held stance?
Click to expand...

I can't explain. Won't get fooled again, at any rate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;