Jump to content

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

I'd doubt that they'd manage to control that tbh.

I struggle to see why Scottish non league clubs would be incapable of pulling off something that similarly sized English non league clubs are currently doing.

My local club, Banbury, are operating the exact 'selling tickets online up to a set limit with very limited walk up' model suggested above and it appears to be working fine. I would say they are about the size of a large Highland/Lowland League club, maybe a small League 2 club, so seems perfectly plausible for those leagues to do similar.

They are currently limited to 600 fans for any given game and as far as I'm aware they haven't even hit that limit yet, which would suggest there's been no great influx of fans of league clubs over and above your normal level of neutrals.

Of course the concerns raised are understanable but they appear to be being mitigated succesfully in England at a similar level so I don't think its crazy to suggest that Scottish non league clubs could manage something similar if allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

I'd doubt that they'd manage to control that tbh.

We could.  At Linlithgow we are ready to go.  We use an online platform to sell our tickets and also have a database held of all our season ticket holders.

We successfully managed the all ticket Falkirk fixture last year and before that had 2500 against Hibs again all ticket.

We have the ground ready for social distancing, riak assessments completed and just need the go ahead for fans to get in.

Edited by Tynierose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snafu said:

Michael Stewart and Willie Miller clash over fan return as pundits debate 'conscious psyche of the nation'

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/michael-stewart-willie-miller-clash-22787028

BBC pundits Michael Stewart and Willie Miller battled in an on-air sparring match after SFA Vice President Mike Mulraney claimed the decision not to allow a football fan return was "political" rather than clinical.

Mulraney had earlier appeared on flagship radio show Sportsound with SPFL chief Neil Doncaster to outline the case for football supporters to return to grounds.

Miller and Stewart were involved in a heated debate as the Aberdeen legend fumed about the inability to continue the work done at test events to provide live matches in a safe environment.

Stewart, who has been vocal in his support for clubs finding a way to provide socially-distanced attendance at games, was keen to present the government's side of the argument as they look to protect the public.

But Miller was adamant that the science has been "overridden" and can't understand why people can visit indoor shopping centres but not stadiums.

Here's how their bust-up played out live.

 

Stewart: "Every decision that a government makes is a political decision and it is always going to be informed by the advice that's given to them.

"I think what Mike (Mulraney) was alluding to there, and I don't want to put words into his mouth, but he views it as a political decision and not solely influenced by the science."

Miller: "It's overridden."

Stewart: "I wouldn't say it's overridden Willie."

Miller: "Well I would!"

Stewart: "Well it's not because..."

Miller: "I'm sorry but I would say it was."

Stewart: "Well where I would disagree with you is the government are going to be taking into account the fans getting to the stadium."

Miller: "We have done that and we have had trials!"

Stewart: "Aye, I know."

Miller: "So we have done that and they have been successful so why can't we continue on?"

Stewart: "Willie, I agree with you but my point is that it's not just a case of people appearing in the stadium and it being all fine, because it's self evident to everybody we can have a good number of supporters in the stadium and it shouldn't be an issue. It's everything that wraps around it that I'm pretty positive is what's concerning the government.

He continued: "It's not purely a political decision, there is going to be science involved in it."

Miller: "What I would want to put to politicians is the shopping centres. Union Square in Aberdeen. How do they get there? By car, public transport and train."

"Thousands go there. So what is the difference? I they tell me the difference they maybe take me with them."

Stewart: "It's a completely valid point. What the problem is is the perception of the wider public. People don't view Union Square as an entity. It's not in the conscious psyche of the nation about Union Square or Princess Square. Whereas football clubs are big iconic entities and people are aware of it."

What a load of sensationalist pish!

It was a perfectly civil debate and no one was raging. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Merkland Red said:

So how will it cripple clubs if they're not allowed to let in the folk they've already sold tickets to?

It's almost as if there's stricter lockdown measures in place than there was when they had the trials. Along with a portion of the general public taking a mile when given an inch.

It's not all about the Premiership - even allowing 300 fans in could be profitable for lower league or non-league clubs. And some Premiership clubs (including Killie) sold their season tickets on the basis that supporters would pay for 19 games and get 19 games, so every home game we miss means we owe our season ticket holders a bigger discount on next season's ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stellaboz said:

Aye it's pretty mental that it's not being considered. You can easily have people go watch games and have social distancing ffs. 

No one is questioning the fact that you can socially distance inside a stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, would fans in Scotland (and we've all seen specific sub-groups across the land) behave any better? Nah. 

https://www.thelocal.dk/20200702/danish-cup-final-stopped-after-fans-break-virus-rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tynierose said:

We could.  At Linlithgow we are ready to go.  We use an online platform to sell our tickets and also have a database held of all our season ticket holders.

We successfully managed the all ticket Falkirk fixture last year and before that had 2500 against Hibs again all ticket.

We have the ground ready for social distancing, riak assessments completed and just need the go ahead for fans to get in.

That's genuinely fantastic you have that in place. I can see why you'd think you should be allowed to open the gates and do it sensibly.

On the flip side I've been to Highland League fund raisers where they've squeezed in as much folk as possible to a function room as possible. It's teams like that who ruin it for teams like yours.

55 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

It's not all about the Premiership - even allowing 300 fans in could be profitable for lower league or non-league clubs. And some Premiership clubs (including Killie) sold their season tickets on the basis that supporters would pay for 19 games and get 19 games, so every home game we miss means we owe our season ticket holders a bigger discount on next season's ticket.

I see your point but it just comes as selfish because it will affect your club.

I commented further in the thread that we're all assuming the lower league teams will cope with whatever demand and do it sensibly. Allegedly Killie had an issue with Covid due to their own negligence (not read anything further today) and that's a professional club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tynierose said:

We could.  At Linlithgow we are ready to go.  We use an online platform to sell our tickets and also have a database held of all our season ticket holders.

We successfully managed the all ticket Falkirk fixture last year and before that had 2500 against Hibs again all ticket.

We have the ground ready for social distancing, riak assessments completed and just need the go ahead for fans to get in.

How many paying customers could you get in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do all businesses have to worry about how their customers get to/from their premises or is it just football teams where too many people using public transport is seen as an issue? That’s a genuine question, I’m not trying to be cute either way. I just can’t believe a football match (with limited numbers) is any more high risk than Sauchiehall Street at chucking out time when everyone spills out of the pubs and heads for the takeaways and taxis en masse. So do the pubs and fast food restaurants need to worry about how their clients get home or is it not their problem? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

On the flip side I've been to Highland League fund raisers where they've squeezed in as much folk as possible to a function room as possible. It's teams like that who ruin it for teams like yours.

Recently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:

How many paying customers could you get in?

We've measured it all out.  Terracing 3 sides and one stand.  We have calculated maximum 600 to be on safe side which is around 23 pct capacity.

Average gate around 450 anyway.

Edited by Tynierose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Junior_Arab said:

Do all businesses have to worry about how their customers get to/from their premises or is it just football teams where too many people using public transport is seen as an issue? That’s a genuine question, I’m not trying to be cute either way. I just can’t believe a football match (with limited numbers) is any more high risk than Sauchiehall Street at chucking out time when everyone spills out of the pubs and heads for the takeaways and taxis en masse. So do the pubs and fast food restaurants need to worry about how their clients get home or is it not their problem? 

People keep looking at this in the wrong way. It’s isn’t about X being as safe as (or safer than) Y, so if Y is allowed why not X.

There’s an overall amount of risk that the Scottish Government is prepared to take. Everything new that’s allowed or opened up will contribute to the risk, and once the limit is reached that’s it. 

For the sake of argument, let’s say that 10% capacity crowds at all 21 SPFL matches each week has the same risk profile as pubs being open as they are now. But only one of these can happen without going above the current acceptable risk level. And so we have the current situation. 

It’s more or less the same reason for why you can still go to the pub but not have people round your house. Even if the latter were safer (which is debatable), if you want the pubs open you can’t have visitors without the overall risk limit being breached. 

Edited by The Master

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

It's not all about the Premiership - even allowing 300 fans in could be profitable for lower league or non-league clubs. And some Premiership clubs (including Killie) sold their season tickets on the basis that supporters would pay for 19 games and get 19 games, so every home game we miss means we owe our season ticket holders a bigger discount on next season's ticket.

An utterly ludicrous commitment for a football club to make when it had precisely zero insight as to if/when crowds would return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Master said:

People keep looking at this in the wrong way. It’s isn’t about X being as safe as (or safer than) Y, so if Y is allowed why not X.

There’s an overall amount of risk that the Scottish Government is prepared to take. Everything new that’s allowed or opened up will contribute to the risk, and once the limit is reached that’s it. 

For the sake of argument, let’s say that 10% capacity crowds at all 21 SPFL matches each week has the same risk profile as pubs being open as they are now. But only one of these can happen without going above the current acceptable risk level. And so we have the current situation. 

It’s more or less the same reason for why you can still go to the pub but not have people round your house. Even if the latter were safer (which is debatable), if you want the pubs open you can’t have visitors without the overall risk limit being breached. 

I accept the point you’re making and it’s something that Jason Leitch has explained  very well on a few occasions on Off the Ball, but if a large part of the official reason that football can’t have any fans in is because of the possible dangers associated with travel to & from the matches (which again I’m sure Prof Leitch has at least hinted at) then football clubs would be entitled to wonder why it was only them that this applied to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Junior_Arab said:

I accept the point you’re making and it’s something that Jason Leitch has explained  very well on a few occasions on Off the Ball, but if a large part of the official reason that football can’t have any fans in is because of the possible dangers associated with travel to & from the matches (which again I’m sure Prof Leitch has at least hinted at) then football clubs would be entitled to wonder why it was only them that this applied to. 

It boils down to the same principle - you already have risk associated with people travelling socially, so you don’t want to compound that by also having people travel for football. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Master said:

People keep looking at this in the wrong way. It’s isn’t about X being as safe as (or safer than) Y, so if Y is allowed why not X.

There’s an overall amount of risk that the Scottish Government is prepared to take. Everything new that’s allowed or opened up will contribute to the risk, and once the limit is reached that’s it. 

For the sake of argument, let’s say that 10% capacity crowds at all 21 SPFL matches each week has the same risk profile as pubs being open as they are now. But only one of these can happen without going above the current acceptable risk level. And so we have the current situation. 

It’s more or less the same reason for why you can still go to the pub but not have people round your house. Even if the latter were safer (which is debatable), if you want the pubs open you can’t have visitors without the overall risk limit being breached. 

This is exactly why it is correctly being described as a political decision and not a clinical one. Certain activities are being prioritised for economic reasons rather than public health reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

It's not all about the Premiership - even allowing 300 fans in could be profitable for lower league or non-league clubs. And some Premiership clubs (including Killie) sold their season tickets on the basis that supporters would pay for 19 games and get 19 games, so every home game we miss means we owe our season ticket holders a bigger discount on next season's ticket.

Maybe I'm stupid but no doubt when the STs go on sale next year I'll think, f**k it the money has gone, and just pay full whack for my ticket again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, invergowrie arab said:

Maybe I'm stupid but no doubt when the STs go on sale next year I'll think, f**k it the money has gone, and just pay full whack for my ticket again.

I suspect this will be the case for many people, and perhaps the club were counting on it. I think United are doing something similar, aren't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

This is exactly why it is correctly being described as a political decision and not a clinical one. Certain activities are being prioritised for economic reasons rather than public health reasons.

Yes, although the noises from the Scottish Government suggest that they’d rather not prioritise anything for economic reasons, but the lack of an ongoing UK furlough scheme gives them no choice. 

Which is another reason why it’s not as simple as comparing football to pubs and restaurants. I’m confident pubs would already be closed again if Holyrood had the fiscal powers to fund their own furlough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I suspect this will be the case for many people, and perhaps the club were counting on it. I think United are doing something similar, aren't they?

Yeah they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...