Coronavirus and Football

Remove this Banner Ad

No isolation needed as opponents on a football pitch are deemed to not be in close enough contact with a positive case.

15 mins within 2m is the definition of close contact. Looks like we're still not marking at corners, tracking runners or pressing under Mourinho
 
No isolation needed as opponents on a football pitch are deemed to not be in close enough contact with a positive case.

15 mins within 2m is the definition of close contact. Looks like we're still not marking at corners, tracking runners or pressing under Mourinho
Regardless I would hope all players and staff are getting tested today to confirm they're OK.
 
Regardless I would hope all players and staff are getting tested today to confirm they're OK.
Tests are Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday. With results on Wednesday and Saturday. Really hopeful for safety/health reasons more than disruption to the club/league for negative tests throughout the 14 day incubation period
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Tests are Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday. With results on Wednesday and Saturday. Really hopeful for safety/health reasons more than disruption to the club/league for negative tests throughout the 14 day incubation period

I would think if a player has tested positive and come into contact with other players, those players should be tested regardless of what day of the week it is.
 
At a guess it'll be if the players test negative.
Was explained the other day by the health minister, it's too early to test people that have come into contact with a positive person.

The virus could still be incubating and a negative test doesn't mean that they haven't caught it.
 
The only real valid reason I can see for not self-isolating anyone from the Norwich/Spurs game is that they all wear these monitors and clubs should have data on how much time each player has spent in close contact with someone else.

Reporting I've seen is more along the lines that "the Norwich player said he wasn't close to a0nyone and the Spurs players all agreed".
 
The only real valid reason I can see for not self-isolating anyone from the Norwich/Spurs game is that they all wear these monitors and clubs should have data on how much time each player has spent in close contact with someone else.

Reporting I've seen is more along the lines that "the Norwich player said he wasn't close to a0nyone and the Spurs players all agreed".

Do we know which player it is? I have Pukki in my fantasy team so hopefully not him.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Are they lining up deals elsewhere? Very surprised about Irvine partciluarly.

We weren't offering them contract extensions so makes perfect sense they don't want to risk injury in the last 9 games with the club offering no support to them. Pretty s**t from the club but par for the course these days.

I have no doubt they were also trying to offer them a lot less money.
 
We weren't offering them contract extensions so makes perfect sense they don't want to risk injury in the last 9 games with the club offering no support to them. Pretty s**t from the club but par for the course these days.

I have no doubt they were also trying to offer them a lot less money.

Geez that would be pretty ordinary if they offered reduced terms for the remainder of the season.
 
Probably more relevant to the Championship thread, but yes pretty heartbreaking news.

Relevant to the championship, but for me it illustrates a wider problem with Project Restart across all division.
 
Relevant to the championship, but for me it illustrates a wider problem with Project Restart across all division.

Illustrates a problem with the owners of my club.

Are there many other players doing the same beyond the few at Charlton I read about? Reckon most clubs would be doing the right things by their players.
 
Illustrates a problem with the owners of my club.

Are there many other players doing the same beyond the few at Charlton I read about? Reckon most clubs would be doing the right things by their players.

Refreshing honesty from you there mate, could easily have spun it as a wider problem of project restart when its your club ownership/ management that are the real problem.
 
Is Liverpool offering Nathaniel Clyne an extension?

I don't agree that it's an ownership problem and not a football problem. The season runs from August to May and peoples contracts are based on that. The fact that it's been extended will effect some clubs more than it will affect others. Wouldn't have a clue if Hull tried to lowball their players, I don't think it's particular relevant if they did or didn't.
 
Is Liverpool offering Nathaniel Clyne an extension?

Andy Lonergan and Adam Lallana were offered contract extensions, Clyne wasn't due to his falling out with Klopp.

Clyne has played something like 10 games for the club since 2017, it's no surprise he wasn't given an extension when others were.
 
Andy Lonergan and Adam Lallana were offered contract extensions, Clyne wasn't due to his falling out with Klopp.

Clyne has played something like 10 games for the club since 2017, it's no surprise he wasn't given an extension when others were.

Yeah Clyne wasnt going to feature so it really doesnt make a difference.

Seems nearly all players that are regularly involved are signing short term extensions. Its definitely an issue for clubs, not football in general and I see no value in moaning about it due tl the highly unusual circumstances. Suspect new regulations will be brought in for automatic extensions in the case of a delayed end of season.

We also have the kit deal with Nike starting in June but that also has been deferred to next season with Nike's blessing allowing New Balance to complete the season which in fairness was what they signed up for.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top