Clyde v East Fife

[BullyWeeStonehouse]

1 minute ago, Big Fifer said:

I can't tell if that deid babies tweet is meant to be a joke or not. Thankfully a brief glance on his twitter suggests he's not an EF fan.

And that it’s probably not meant to be a joke judging by the amount of absolutely wild tweets!

[Blootoon87]

Isn't that Jimmy85 that used to post on here?

[Jack Burton]

Probably the wildest tweet of the past year. And that’s saying something!
 

Pulled out too late if their partner is already pregnant.

[the_bully_wee]

Isn't that Jimmy85 that used to post on here?

Aye, certainly has all the hallmarks of being him. Never quite worked out if he was radio rental or just constantly at it for nibbles.

[Bully Wee Villa]

If the player affected was on the coach to Peterhead and in the dressing room, surely the whole team has to isolate and we won't be able to fulfil our fixtures?

[Mybitchunderprotest]

I doubt your six year-old son was working under the same covid protocols that professional footballers are.

Clubs have had to use multiple changing rooms and spaces to ensure social distancing, and I'd assume this will be the case here.

Highly likely that the 6 year old was training under more stringent protocols.

[Blootoon87]

I thought that as well, wasn't he a Dunfermline supporter rather than East Fife?

Aye, he's a Dunfermline fan. Just trolls everyone.

[Bully Wee Villa]

Yeah, he's on the wind up.

[BullyWeeStonehouse]

His patter is shite.

[SLClyde]

Claiming my use of the word lunacy is a mental health jibe, clearly in the perma offended category

[Jack Burton]

If the player affected was on the coach to Peterhead and in the dressing room, surely the whole team has to isolate and we won't be able to fulfil our fixtures?

No, there is protocols in place to prevent that and no way they would have given the go-ahead for tonight's game.

[Shadwell Dog]

24 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

But whenever the test was taken, you'd have to assume the positive player was infected before Saturday.

Yes but he was tested at the same time as every other Clyde player and we know they all came back negative.  It's what happened between that test and tonight that matters. If the test was after the match Saturday then chances of infection for the other Clyde players are low especially as the players had no contact till tonight and will have followed covid protocols since arriving at the ground.

 

 

[Bully Wee Villa]

In that case is it possibly just a false positive? Do they retest players?

[Gordon EF]

1 minute ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Yes but he was tested at the same time as every other Clyde player and we know they all came back negative.  It's what happened between that test and tonight that matters. If the test was after the match Saturday then chances of infection for the other Clyde players are low especially as the players had no contact till tonight and will have followed covid protocols since arriving at the ground.

 

 

I'm assuming that a player infected on Saturday afternoon wouldn't test positive on Saturday evening. Doesn't it take at least a few days to show up on a test?

[haufdaft]

Would East Fife have played the match of it was an East Fife player that tested positive?

[Hughsie]

I’m not really sure I follow East Fife’s logic here. If this test had been returned yesterday and the game was given the go ahead would they have refused to play?

[Replays]

I’m possibly overthinking this but does the fact that the players are testing (I assume) roughly every two days not negate that too? Any isolating, in wider society, is generally only undertaken from the date a positive test was taken, if there were no symptoms beforehand. I assume the same would apply in football too. If protocols have been followed correctly on Saturday and tonight, then the risk of transmission to others should remain low.

Edited April 27, 2021 by Scott-Replay

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

1 minute ago, haufdaft said:

Would East Fife have played the match of it was an East Fife player that tested positive?

More to the point... would East Fife have refused to play the match if they needed the 3 points?

[airdrieman]

1 hour ago, Newbornbairn said:

Falkirk and who?

Brechin (apparently). 

[David W]

For me, the only question mark is the lateness of the test coming through. We've already seen a similar situation with the Scotland youth team. Without a full knowledge of the testing regime it's hard to make a judgement there.

It's entirely possible that the three parties have done nothing wrong. Clyde may have followed the protocols, the JRG might have quite rightly said the game could go ahead accordingly, and East Fife are entitled to feel wary given the fact they were literally walking out onto the pitch. I totally understand that. I'm sure they might have viewed things differently had it not been an immediate situation they were facing. It seems like an unfortunate set of circumstances.

However, on the face of it, can they get away with simply refusing to play a game that they've been told can go ahead? If there's not been any protocols broken, I don't see them having a particular strong argument, as much as their decision is understandable. On another point, the fact Dumbarton are affected means nothing either; if this had happened when EF play Peterhead why should that be viewed differently?

Either way, this once again emphasises that the clubs were absolutely idiotic to plump for this nonsense 22 game season. Clyde more than anyone.