The Hypothetical Roadmap to Getting Fans Back in the SPFL Grounds Discussion

[DukDukGoose]

2 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

Surely the test events were the euros and the fanzones? 

That's a different scenario surely? For one it's not the clubs who are responsible for what happened at the Euros where I believe the SFA and Government worked together on that.

Can't imagine local councils have the infrastructure in place to ensure games going on at the same time across the country are adhered to properly.

[Willie adie]

6 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

You do realise the amount of money clubs have not only spent to play during covid, but lost as well, 

Yes , but so have many other business and industry yet football which got far more leeway and concession than others still expects more, I've been saying since this started in the preceding 20 odd years. To the inception of the cartel (SPL) 

Football, clubs, governing bodies, sponsors, and broadcasters havent given a flying f**k about supporters, they were the necessary evil, there to be fleeced and ripped off at every opportunity, 

The never listened to fans on kick off times,. League setup, adminission prices etc , only now when they want only one thing our money again are they pedalling the rhetoric that fans are important

 

 

[54_and_counting]

6 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

That's a different scenario surely? For one it's not the clubs who are responsible for what happened at the Euros where I believe the SFA and Government worked together on that.

Can't imagine local councils have the infrastructure in place to ensure games going on at the same time across the country are adhered to properly.

Given the clubs have more to lose, id guess they would be more stringent with attendance rules, plus as i said earlier, how can ross county be granted 1 fan per 3 seats in their ground while aberdeen are 1 per 10 seats, rangers are 1 per 27 seats etc

[DukDukGoose]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

Given the clubs have more to lose, id guess they would be more stringent with attendance rules, plus as i said earlier, how can ross county be granted 1 fan per 3 seats in their ground while aberdeen are 1 per 10 seats, rangers are 1 per 27 seats etc

Why should we be granted more because we have bigger stadiums? 

It's not the Government's fault that the football season begins at beginning of August with minimal pre season fixtures beforehand. 

I'd agree with you if the country had been at level 0 for months. We haven't though.

[54_and_counting]

2 minutes ago, Willie adie said:

Yes , but so have many other business and industry yet football which got far more leeway and concession than others still expects more, I've been saying since this started in the preceding 20 odd years. To the inception of the cartel (SPL) 

Football, clubs, governing bodies, sponsors, and broadcasters havent given a flying f**k about supporters, they were the necessary evil, there to be fleeced and ripped off at every opportunity, 

The never listened to fans on kick off times,. League setup, adminission prices etc , only now when they want only one thing our money again are they pedalling the rhetoric that fans are important

 

 

That is a completely different argument, dingwall holds just over 6.5k fans, i know one of their fans will likely correct me but what fo we think their ST's are, about 3k?, so they can accomodate 2/3's of their ST fanbase, aberdeen sell what 10k ST's maybe more im not sure, but still say 10k, thats 1/5 of their ST fanbase

Now given restrictions were based on "science" can they then explain the science behind these new rules 

[54_and_counting]

2 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Why should we be granted more because we have bigger stadiums? 

It's not the Government's fault that the football season begins at beginning of August with minimal pre season fixtures beforehand. 

I'd agree with you if the country had been at level 0 for months. We haven't though.

If you have bigger stadium you can safely space out more fans, thought that was obvious, if crowd restrictions are about the science then a blanket 2k capacity for every seated stadium flies against the idea of social distancing 

[54_and_counting]

1 hour ago, big al said:

You aren’t at level 0 this Saturday. Level 2 until Monday, so more chance next week of bigger crowds when into level 0 surely?

Yet level 2 still allowed an unregulated fan zone to exist that held 2k fans twice a day 

[DukDukGoose]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

If you have bigger stadium you can safely space out more fans, thought that was obvious, if crowd restrictions are about the science then a blanket 2k capacity for every seated stadium flies against the idea of social distancing 

I'd imagine it takes footfall in to account.

[AJF]

7 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

I'd imagine it takes footfall in to account.

This is where the problem is, we are having to guess on such matters. In the last few posts you’ve hypothesised that it’s to do with the local authority being able to manage games on the same day across the country and now imagining footfall is included.

We have not been given any reasoning whatsoever and everything is all hush hush.

If footfall was the issue and Hampden managed to get round this by staggering entry times for 12,000 then I don’t see why clubs cannot do the same.

If the issue is local authority infrastructure to accommodate games across the country, again I’m not sure why that matters. Any local authority would surely base it on precisely their own local authority. Given that fixtures for different clubs in the same local authority tend to be scheduled for different days then that’s that issue resolved already.

I can’t see how anyone can look at the matches at Hampden in comparison to the measures now being placed on domestic football and determine that we are not being treated differently.

[DukDukGoose]

3 minutes ago, AJF said:

This is where the problem is, we are having to guess on such matters. In the last few posts you’ve hypothesised that it’s to do with the local authority being able to manage games on the same day across the country and now imagining footfall is included.

We have not been given any reasoning whatsoever and everything is all hush hush.

If footfall was the issue and Hampden managed to get round this by staggering entry times for 12,000 then I don’t see why clubs cannot do the same.

If the issue is local authority infrastructure to accommodate games across the country, again I’m not sure why that matters. Any local authority would surely base it on precisely their own local authority. Given that fixtures for different clubs in the same local authority tend to be scheduled for different days then that’s that issue resolved already.

I can’t see how anyone can look at the matches at Hampden in comparison to the measures now being placed on domestic football and determine that we are not being treated differently.

Of course we're being treated differently. One was in international event, where one of games were being played.

The other is putting a process in place where the individual clubs have to manage and organise the process to make sure there's no breaking of protocol.

[54_and_counting]

18 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

I'd imagine it takes footfall in to account.

It shouldn't, do you think all stores in buchanan galleries for example have the same capacity? A recent wee jaunt to edinburgh, seen the new st james quarter shopping centre, people queuing up for the lego shop for example as it had a capacity of about 20 if lucky, john lewis over 3 floors didn't have that problem

How the crowds get to the grounds shouldn't really be an issue, public transport is limited capacity, theres no limits on how many can walk the streets, so its about just getting fans in through the turnstiles, and thats it

[54_and_counting]

2 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Of course we're being treated differently. One was in international event, where one of games were being played.

The other is putting a process in place where the individual clubs have to manage and organise the process to make sure there's no breaking of protocol.

Or perhaps the individual clubs should just throw money at the scottish government, like the rugby must have done given the relaxation of all restrictions they got 

[AJF]

8 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Of course we're being treated differently. One was in international event, where one of games were being played.

The other is putting a process in place where the individual clubs have to manage and organise the process to make sure there's no breaking of protocol.

What is the difference in the SG/local authority saying to the SFA they can host X amount of fans if they meet conditions X, Y and Z compared to the SG/local authority saying to clubs they can host X amount of fans if they meet conditions X, Y and Z? There shouldn’t be any difference in my opinion.

If we group both the SFA and the clubs together as the facilitators for want of a better term, they each have the same responsibility.

Just because one was an international match should have no bearing I feel, both the SFA and Clubs would have to facilitate the respective matches safely, it just appears one is being given more favourable treatment and less hoops to jump through.

Edited July 14, 2021 by AJF

[DukDukGoose]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

What is the difference in the SG/local authority saying to the SFA they can host X amount of fans if they meet conditions X, Y and Z compared to the SG/local authority saying to clubs they can host X amount of fans if they meet conditions X, Y and Z? There shouldn’t be any difference in my opinion.

If we group both the SFA and the clubs together as the facilitators for want of a better term, they each have the same responsibility.

Just because one was an international match should have no bearing I feel, both the SFA and Clubs would have to facilitate the respective matches safely, it just appears one is being given more favourable treatment and less hoops to jump through.

Enjoy your day.

[AJF]

10 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Enjoy your day.

[RossDee01]

3 hours ago, AJF said:

This is exactly the type of view the SG are hoping people have when they impose ridiculous restrictions.

It doesn't matter one jot what sense of entitlement football has - any decision that impacts a business's ability to trade normally HAS to be based on clinical advice and backed up with solid reasoning. It's not enough to limit a business's source of income because you think they are "entitled".

Yes, because Rangers fans have shown right the way through this pandemic that they can be trusted.

[RandomGuy.]

3 hours ago, AJF said:

For what reasons was Hampden allowed a special dispensation to ignore social distancing guidelines?

Presumably because Scotland playing at home in the Euros was a special, potentially once in a lifetime opportunity, while Rangers playing a friendly at Ibrox is not?

[Dons_1988]

Assuming all goes to plan, are we not talking about all of these restrictions on capacity being gone in a few weeks?

 

[RandomGuy.]

2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Assuming all goes to plan, are we not talking about all of these restrictions on capacity being gone in a few weeks?

 

Pretty much a month is it not?

August 9th at the earliest.

[Dons_1988]

1 minute ago, RandomGuy. said:

Pretty much a month is it not?

August 9th at the earliest.

Yeah, I’m being loose with ‘a few’. 

My point anyway is that with the removal of restrictions being imminent, I’m not sure it’s worth the outrage for the sake of a few weeks.