Jump to content

Skyline Drifter

Platinum Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Skyline Drifter

  1. It's not that simple. The restrictions themselves discouraged attendance. For instance the 1st of our two home games in the period did not sell out the 500, having a crowd of 440 or so I think off the top of my head. As poor as our crowds have been this season, we've not had a crowd lower than 980 when no restrictions existed. It didn't sell out but that's because people either chose not to faff about with advance applications, couldn't be bothered with it or didn't understand the process or just didn't realise until too late that they couldn't just rock up on the day. I doubt we were unique. Away fans were routinely banned across the divisions unless the match in question could clearly accommodate both sides. There will be games that had under 500 that would have been way over it if away fans had been welcomed. Whilst I accept that giving for instance Celtic a significant share of this will be a tad ridiculous, they will have faced costs and inconvenience from having to move games to change the shutdown inevitably.
  2. They certainly weren't completely unaffected. They had a round of fixtures on Boxing Day that was limited to 500 fans. St Johnstone, Rangers, Motherwell, Hearts, Dundee United and Aberdeen all played a home game with 500 attendance limit. I assume Rangers probably weren't massively financially impacted though. Are the majority of their fans not season ticket holders who wouldn't have been paying anyway? The biggest losers were probably St Johnstone who lost a visiting Celtic crowd. To an extent that's true. Though other than that one round of Premiership fixtures, it's not unreasonable to point out that only the Championship was significantly affected by the restriction. Falkirk presumably also. I know 9 out of 10 League 1 sides have an average attendance above 500, but most of them aren't far above it and averages are probably corrupted by the visiting Falkirk support. I fully expect there won't be any means testing this time either and whatever is given to each division will be split evenly, taking no account for instance of the fact we lost a visit from Killie (and so will Thistle) and Raith lost a derby crowd with Dunfermline whilst Kilmarnock themselves moved their moneyspinning game to not lose the cash. Getting support for doing so would be ironic to say the least.
  3. Sadly his only goal came away to Inverness, so denying us the chance to play Ebeneezer Goode over the PA to celebrate it, though we used it on social media
  4. The English non League scene is certainly a potential source for players and one we've used relatively well in the last couple of years. We picked up Ayo Obileye and Nortei Nortey last season (& indirectly Izzy Jones). This year Josh Debayo, Udoka Chima and indirectly Roberto Nditi. Chima has been injured all season and Nortey was injured for a large portion of last year but the others have done pretty well. Obileye played every game and got himself a move into the Premiership. Izzy Jones granted had already been picked up by Middlesbrough but he was an absolute star and thats showing now with him English Championship Player of the Month for December. Josh Debayo and Roberto Nditi have played every game they've been fit for since signing. With defenders in particular in short supply in the Scottish game at the moment its a good source of players. From the player's point of view it is a far higher profile place to play and if young and no ties down South they can get themselves noticed and maybe pick up a bigger side up here or down South (see Obileye or Nouble for that matter).
  5. It may be that @craigkillie is correct and it will change again but it wouldn't be the first time football has followed different guidance from the rest of the population. Until anything changes clubs will be obliged to comply with the JRG requirements though.
  6. Fundamentally none of that matter though. The clubs will have to comply with what the JRG say. At the moment that guidance is saying if you have an expectation of under 1,000 no checks are required for football matches and if you expect over 1,000 then you check 50% or 1,000 people, whichever is the higher. Events where expectation is over 1,000 fans MUST be fully vaccinated including booster or able to show a negative LFT. Furthermore, all matches clubs should recommend and encourage that fans take an LFT before attendance regardless of vaccine status.
  7. It's been amended this morning to clarify that the checking scheme is only required at games with an expected attendance of 1,000. So won't apply if you can legitimately say you expect 900 for instance.
  8. Remarkable isn't it. They are right though. Like these daft changes when they announce that a country is no longer safe and therefore they'll be changing the rules to travel there in a few days, it makes no sense to defer the changes. Either it's acceptable to have more than 500 in stadiums now or it isn't. It doesn't become acceptable on Monday morning one minute after midnight. It may be that some clubs will consider it too late to change things for this weekend anyway (I guess that may depend on how many extra bodies they might get for a bit of work) but the rules should be changed immediately and give the clubs that option. Other clubs may flirt with moving games to Monday, though visiting clubs are unlikely to be keen I imagine, but Thistle can't do this due to being on tv. We probably lost circa £25k to £30k by not being able to have a Kilmarnock support last weekend. I've no doubt Thistle will lose even more as they can probably accommodate more of them, even at this late stage.
  9. You have to register it with the NHS and then show the text the send you back.
  10. It's inevitable now it genuinely WILL be somewhere in the 990 - 999 range and everyone will just assume we've contrived it! Our last unrestricted home crowd was 998.
  11. Yeah, it's not how we operate though. We have kids from the u18 squad operate turnstiles where they take a stub off a ticket already sold at a kiosk. All paper, not online. I can't see us giving 16 and 17 year olds the responsibility to check vaccine passports. That's interesting. I didn't consider that. I doubt it makes any real odds though. 1st time around Dunfermline crowd was 1,071. All the games were over 1,000 except for Raith (964), Inverness (942) and Ayr Utd (998). We don't play Raith again till mid March and the others in April. Even Arbroath back in September had a 1,174 crowd. I guess it may be possible to make a case that imminent games with current form, worse weather and a lot more Covid about, will have lower crowds. To be honest it would be a surprise if the guidance hasn't changed again by the time we play Arbroath in late February. We're probably only talking about that Dunfermline game. Again, the JRG pronouncement I quoted above was very clear. It may be they'll re-issue something too but what it says is 50% of crowd or 1,000 people, whichever is higher. It also made no distinction either for games under 1,000 though so we'll see.
  12. It's not that big a deal for fans though some will either refuse to comply, not know that they need to (we still had fans rocking up at Palmerston on Saturday not aware they needed to have pre-registered for a ballot for an eticket to get in), or not understand the whole thing. For the club it means sourcing more staff to check the things. A thankless task to get people who will just be the ones to get it in the neck from the above categories of fans. It's ridiculous for an outdoor event in a stadium which will be 15% of capacity at best and where even this weekend they are happily allowing up to 200 people to sit indoors behind glass to watch games without any checking. It's nuts.
  13. Whole thing isn't designed to deal with events staged on a walk up basis where you don't necessarily know the attendance beforehand. Effectively if you might have a gate between say 800 and 1,400 you are going to have to check everyone as they arrive as there doesn't on the face of it appear to be practical alternative. You can't Not check them in case the crowd does end up over 1,000.
  14. The JRG update issued after the speech today is perfectly clear: Again, as that stands, if we have a crowed of 1,001 in our next home match v Dunfermline we'll be required to check vaccine passports for 1,000 of them.
  15. Only if your ground is all seater. It was 4,000 if you had terracing.
  16. I see, thanks. I take an LFT daily as required to access Red Zone at football but I've never registered it anywhere in NHS terms. I register it with the club to comply with SFA rules. I've never actually attended anything at all outside my own clubs fixtures since Covid became "a thing" so not needed to provide anything to 3rd parties. QoS previously not caught by regulations requiring 4,000+ to have any effect. I do have a vaccine passport but haven't ever had to display it.
  17. Eh, it does say that doesn't it? And that would still mean for a crowd of 1,200 you'd have to check 1,000. For a crowd of 1,001 you'd have to check 1,000 too.
  18. How do you actually prove a recent lateral flow? Obviously they don't stand at the turnstile doing one. This hasn't affected us before so genuinely not sure. Do they have to register it somewhere so it comes up on your passport? Or do you literally take a plastic test result out of your pocket?
  19. Pretty sure we wouldn't agree to move our game at Inverness unless someone picks up the bill for the hotel already paid for.
  20. As did I. And if your crowd could potentially be anything from 900 to say 1,300 on a walk up basis you're effectively going to have to check all of them because you're not going to know until numbers are collated what the crowd was. It's actually a logistical nightmare for us. Unless we organise in advance to only sell 999 tickets on an all ticket basis. Which causes it's own problem. Grrrrr.
  21. Just posted on the QoS thread but presumably this leaves us either limiting the crowd to 999 or undertaking a pain in the backside checking procedure of at least 1,000 people (given our current crowds that's effectively saying we need to check everyone). Previously vaccine passports were only required at events over 4,000. I presume even if we were to limit the crowd to 999 it would still only be those with a vaccine passport?
  22. So we have to either limit the crowd to 999 or undertake to check vaccine passports of at least 1,000 people attending games. And a vaccine passport will be required for attendees. Need to see what the detail is as to whether a negative test can be used instead or if kids who aren't allowed a vaccine are exempted. Anyone know?
  23. Well here: here: here: and here: for a start. It's remarkable the way you need to be reminded what you've posted within the last page and hour.
  24. I'm not the one making a daft assertion that the focus of the Scottish Government is on three sell out Murrayfield rugby internationals over all else though.
  25. It's not going to have played any more a role than the looming Old Firm match and return of the Premiership. Or the Scottish Cup ties due for next weekend.
  • Create New...