Jump to content

Catalans and Toulouse told they can’t play at home until September (Merged threads)


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

  They  must be attempting to bankrupt Mr Gausch.He was struggling back in March after Leeds were not able to travel,and the game was postponed.

   It will be a significant cost.

   Don't think it will happen.

Thats what I was thinking..who would foot. the cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


31 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

For how long? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years?

And if it meant losing your job? Your career? Your home? Your business?

Are you honestly saying you would give up all that, for an unknown amount of time to avoid taking the risk?

This very much sums up the predicament. If we lift the lockdown or loosen, we risk increasing deaths further. If we do not, we risk a pandemic of mental health problems, domestic abuse, heart attacks, delayed cancer diagnoses, economic ruin and consequently austerity related deaths. There are no easy answers from what I can see, and no answer that avoid suffering.

Back to rugby league, I wonder whether we may see a centenary-like season as we did in 1995 before returning to summer as we did in 1996? The multi-national element of Super League makes things more complex, but I would be surprised to see a pre-September return. Especially given the frequency of heavy contact, wrestling and as grim as it is, the fact that sweat, saliva and blood from one player will often contact another.

  • Like 3

Twitter: @TrylineUK
Latest Blog: Bringing the Game to a New Audience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DoubleD said:

It's deja vu, but how's it any different than a return to open plan offices, commuting on trains/tube/planes, shopping in malls etc etc. Social distancing is incompatable in all these cases. If we're going to return to some form of normality, then we're going to have to accept some risk

Would you accept the risk of playing in the front or second row and packing down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Fartownfrontrow said:

Will be very interesting to see what happens in the NRL when they start playing again on 28th MAY ? 

One case where transmission could be tracked and god forbid a fatality because of the interaction of player's and then it stops.

And any player who would willingly put his wife, kids, partner, parents etc at risk needs to give his head a good wobble.

Edited by Harry Stottle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

To pack down in a scrum heads interlocked while this virus is still prevalent would that be Brave or Stupid?

It would be interesting to hear how others would view that?

Not really, it depends on your view of risk. Plenty of people have had the virus and not shown any symptoms and able bodied athletes, whilst not necessarily immune, are certainly not a high risk category 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you will not make the same mistake again as at the beginning of the epidemic by continuing to play in front of crowds ... It is certain that this stupidity has cost the life of some of your supporters ... Dead for going to see a rugby match ....

  • Like 1

www.fcl13.fr FCL XIII - Lezignan Corbieres Rugby League

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DoubleD said:

Not really, it depends on your view of risk. Plenty of people have had the virus and not shown any symptoms and able bodied athletes, whilst not necessarily immune, are certainly not a high risk category 

As I said in the next answer DD, just one.

You seem to think that it is just the player's at risk, it ain't it is everyone who comes into contact with the players also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

To pack down in a scrum heads interlocked while this virus is still prevalent would that be Brave or Stupid?

It would be interesting to hear how others would view that?

Only the same as actually playing the game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

To pack down in a scrum heads interlocked while this virus is still prevalent would that be Brave or Stupid?

It would be interesting to hear how others would view that?

The question for me is: will players be given the choice?

Infection rates are falling rapidly so by July, combined with increased testing if available, you can see a pathway for this to work. Not eliminating all risk, that's impossible, but enough that many would probably be wiling to risk it for continued employment. Millions of people - and our governments - are going to have to make those decisions and there's no simple answers. 

On the other hand, even small risk is a problem for some. For instance my wife has chronic asthma. I'm lucky enough to be one of those who've been able to keep working at home with little disruption,  and I've no intention to going back to riding crowded tubes and packing into a Canary Wharf office block until much further down the line, even if others are.

I'd be concerned if players were forced into a situation where they were compelled to play, because a majority felt safe, or desperate enough for the money. It should be a choice, but not one you're penalised for by losing your contract.         

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

One case where transmission could be tracked and god forbid a fatality because of the interaction of player's and then it stops.

And any player who would willingly put his wife, kids, partner, parents etc at risk needs to give his head a good wobble.

I do wonder what their plan is for this. Yes, the risk of contraction, and then serious complications, in Oz right now is very low, but it's not eliminated entirely. They could make make all this effort, but one cluster of cases in one team could derail it all.

I suppose the thing is not to see it in isolation -  if sports match the level of risk that society as a whole is willing to take, then any hiccups will be tolerated. But the sport that return first is going to take the worst of the complaints, so only the biggest ones can do that.  NRL/VFL in Oz, and Prem here. Once they've done it without major issues, then British rugby league can follow a few weeks later.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

As I said in the next answer DD, just one.

You seem to think that it is just the player's at risk, it ain't it is everyone who comes into contact with the players also.

Of course that’s the case, but there’s risk everywhere when we return to some form of normality whether it’s going on a train, kids returning to school, shopping etc etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Would you accept the risk of playing in the front or second row and packing down?

in this situation harry  make a temporary rule change and don't have scrums let the non offending team play the ball and carry on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I do wonder what their plan is for this. Yes, the risk of contraction, and then serious complications, in Oz right now is very low, but it's not eliminated entirely. They could make make all this effort, but one cluster of cases in one team could derail it all.

I suppose the thing is not to see it in isolation -  if sports match the level of risk that society as a whole is willing to take, then any hiccups will be tolerated. But the sport that return first is going to take the worst of the complaints, so only the biggest ones can do that.  NRL/VFL in Oz, and Prem here. Once they've done it without major issues, then British rugby league can follow a few weeks later.  

If the risk in the UK is deemed to be of the same level and more importantly managed the same as in Aus, will that be the case though? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You could realistically put on all the SL games in one stadium over three or four days with 6-700 people and most of them still being able to keep 2m distance

Why should any of the 6 - 700 keep two meters apart if 34 players and the officials, trainers, physio's etc of each game are not expected to comply, it wouldn't be for safety reason's would it Scotchy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

If the risk in the UK is deemed to be of the same level and more importantly managed the same as in Aus, will that be the case though? 

I probably wasn't clear enough. The return of NRL will have no direct impact on English sport - other than perhaps to show how far we are from reaching their levels of virus control. It will be the Prem that leads the way here and sets the tone for all others in England. It will be a political/societal decision, not just a medical/sporting one. Once the public see Harry Kane jostling with a defender at a cornerkick, can the govt really tell the public that their own contact is still forbidden?

Then of course there are rugby-specific factors which I've seen very little scientific discussion of: is the risk of transmission higher in rugby than football or cricket due to the extreme contact that players have? We don't actually know the scientific answer to that, i think the experts are only really looking at that now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I probably wasn't clear enough. The return of NRL will have no direct impact on English sport - other than perhaps to show how far we are from reaching their levels of virus control. It will be the Prem that leads the way here and sets the tone for all others in England. It will be a political/societal decision, not just a medical/sporting one. Once the public see Harry Kane jostling with a defender at a cornerkick, can the govt really tell the public that their own contact is still forbidden?

Then of course there are rugby-specific factors which I've seen very little scientific discussion of: is the risk of transmission higher in rugby than football or cricket due to the extreme contact that players have? We don't actually know the scientific answer to that, i think the experts are only really looking at that now.

True but the fear of infection might make the players bend their backs and tackle round the legs?

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

The question for me is: will players be given the choice?

Infection rates are falling rapidly so by July, combined with increased testing if available, you can see a pathway for this to work. Not eliminating all risk, that's impossible, but enough that many would probably be wiling to risk it for continued employment. Millions of people - and our governments - are going to have to make those decisions and there's no simple answers. 

On the other hand, even small risk is a problem for some. For instance my wife has chronic asthma. I'm lucky enough to be one of those who've been able to keep working at home with little disruption,  and I've no intention to going back to riding crowded tubes and packing into a Canary Wharf office block until much further down the line, even if others are.

I'd be concerned if players were forced into a situation where they were compelled to play, because a majority felt safe, or desperate enough for the money. It should be a choice, but not one you're penalised for by losing your contract.         

  Interestingly,though I didn't listen to the Talk Radio show he was on,Simon Jordan,the former owner of Crystal Palace football club was stating a number of reasons why he thinks the soccer season should be called off immediately.

 One of the reasons he gave was ...Corporate manslaughter.

 A showstopper in my view.No one would enjoy going to a court-post pandemic,facing that little charge.

  The players have already lost money that was promised on contracts.No way would their partners/family/children want them to play sport and face the risk of losing their lives.

   We'll see how Germany get on playing soccer at the time they reckon they will restart.Don't think it's gonna happen.

Edited by Angelic Cynic

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The virus cannot spring out of nowhere,  it must be transmitted person to person, so if all players, officials,  media staff, security staff etc, have been clear for 14 days, the length of incubation,  and all these people have been separated from all other contact,  then play can safely resume.  I expect the Premier league players to be isolated in their training camps  , tested regularly so that they are clear for 14 days, driven to the stadia for the games and driven back. No going home for a month or so, same for all other staff involved in the whole process. The EPL.are planning  on spending millions on testing kits for this reason. Unfortunately RL doesn't have the resources to do this, plus the SL season has some way to go , so players can't be billetted in hotels as Prem stars can, RL players will have to go home and therefore can get the virus.

I think SL should start in September if possible,  carrying on where we left off, but each team plays the other once, 11 games, then play offs  GF , then put the season to bed, and start again with 2021 on time. The problem with this is of course finances,  will clubs fold with only 5 or 6 home games of gate income ? TBH I don't know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

  Interestingly,though I didn't listen to the Talk Radio show he was on,Simon Jordan,the former owner of Crystal Palace football club was stating a number of reasons why he thinks the soccer season should be called off immediately.

 One of the reasons he gave was ...Corporate manslaughter.

 A showstopper in my view.No one would enjoy going to a court-post pandemic,facing that little charge.

  The players have already lost money that was promised on contracts.No way would their partners/family/children want them to play sport and face the risk of losing their lives.

   We'll see how Germany get on playing soccer at the time they reckon they will restart.Don't think it's gonna happen.

But, again, how is that different than any other workplace? Or should we continue to stay at home forever?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

To pack down in a scrum heads interlocked while this virus is still prevalent would that be Brave or Stupid?

It would be interesting to hear how others would view that?

When you drill down Harry over 99.9% of the population have not been seriously harmed.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/.

Slightly better than that worldwide.

Of the 0.03% who have sadly died in UK 95% have had a serious underlying condition https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-95-of-victims-in-england-hospitals-had-underlying-health-conditions-11979733 . Only 1% of the 0.03%  (including with conditions) were under 40.

None of the  95% of 0.03% play professional Rugby League (or any professional sport for that matter). 

The chances of a reasonably healthy,  never mind super fit , individual under 40, so the set of professional RL players (or pro sports people)  suffering harm from this disease are negligible and no different from them dying of any other cause on any particular day. The risk of actually getting infected is slightly higher of course but still much less than 0.001%.

So yes, I would happily take the risk if I was still young enough to play, and would happily take the risk anyway in any other facet of life whilst of course respecting others rights not to. Players (some current) I have interacted with (very small sample) have said the same.

Whilst this is inconvenient to many, the sadness of the situation for those affected does not change the facts or the science of the disease.  The situation we find ourselves in owes as much to us being in 2020, and all that entails, as to the disease itself.

As others have pointed out we accept risk every day of our lives. Some much more than Covid 19 but because we accept the risk everyday we do not realise it. For a professional RL player to not take the risk is akin to not wanting to get up in a morning and take part in life...the risk is the same.

However of course,  the choice MUST be  down to the individual and as somebody else stated, there should be no penalty for not taking part.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...