[Albion] Covid Passports *may* allow return to full Premier League crowds

[Sid in the Sharknado]

Protecting who? People that have already had the vaccine?

Do you also want flu vaccines for under 50’s and have them on your vaccine passport as a requirement to get into a football ground?

Largely, people who for whatever reason are unable to get vaccinated or are otherwise unusually vulnerable. And the minority of people who do get ill after being vaccinated. People from other countries not fortunate enough to have had access. And people who have, for reasons I do not begin to understand, chosen not to have it.

No, because the risks associated with flu are significantly lower than the risks associated with Covid.

 

[Bry Nylon]

Inferring that people who don’t see the need to take the vaccine as a mad conspiracy theorist and also that these people have somehow added to his ‘suffering’.

It’s not a legal requirement. I won’t be getting it, I’ve already had Covid or Coronavirus or whatever they are calling it this week.

Well, on that basis I am very pleased that our paths are very unlikely to cross in those situations where proof of vaccination will be required - be that at the football, a foreign holiday destination or wherever else it becomes necessary.

Not because I am concerned you might give me Covid but because frankly you sound like a bit of a dick.

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

I'm still not sure if kier starmers stance is the correct one.
I understand that a negative test could be worth more than double vaccinated but will the approach of testing actually help us get back to something like normal?
I was coming round to the idea that everyone in a venue being vaccinated would be a better course of action until we have seen the back of this crisis.
If people need a negative test to gain entry then would we run the risk of vaccinated people who are less likely to be a burden to the NHS being told they can't go and non vaccinated passing as positive and going but catching it on the train,bus or pub etc.
Could we also end up with a situation where we have a large amount of our fans vaccinated but a half empty ground, especially as case numbers are growing.
I'm sure kier starmer has better info than me but does anyone think he is right or wrong on this?

 

[dazzer6666]

I'm still not sure if kier starmers stance is the correct one.
I understand that a negative test could be worth more than double vaccinated but will the approach of testing actually help us get back to something like normal?
I was coming round to the idea that everyone in a venue being vaccinated would be a better course of action until we have seen the back of this crisis.
If people need a negative test to gain entry then would we run the risk of vaccinated people who are less likely to be a burden to the NHS being told they can't go and non vaccinated passing as positive and going but catching it on the train,bus or pub etc.
Could we also end up with a situation where we have a large amount of our fans vaccinated but a half empty ground, especially as case numbers are growing.
I'm sure kier starmer has better info than me but does anyone think he is right or wrong on this?

'Normal' will be when data showing 90%+ have been double jabbed and deaths and hospitalisations at manageable levels. If/when we reach that point (end September ish I expect) then all the checking (at least domestically) will stop as we learn to live with it.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm still not sure if kier starmers stance is the correct one.
I understand that a negative test could be worth more than double vaccinated but will the approach of testing actually help us get back to something like normal?
I was coming round to the idea that everyone in a venue being vaccinated would be a better course of action until we have seen the back of this crisis.
If people need a negative test to gain entry then would we run the risk of vaccinated people who are less likely to be a burden to the NHS being told they can't go and non vaccinated passing as positive and going but catching it on the train,bus or pub etc.
Could we also end up with a situation where we have a large amount of our fans vaccinated but a half empty ground, especially as case numbers are growing.
I'm sure kier starmer has better info than me but does anyone think he is right or wrong on this?

Starmer appears to be opposing for the sake of it, evidenced by statements that it wont work, when we dont actually have a proposed implementation.

and because of that if it looks like its playing well among certain groups of voters, the government will ditch it without concern for the merits. they then might instead make it up to venues, and clubs with their community outlook will probably favour impose their own restriction, while say music venues wont. and we have a glorious mess.

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

'Normal' will be when data showing 90%+ have been double jabbed and deaths and hospitalisations at manageable levels. If/when we reach that point (end September ish I expect) then all the checking (at least domestically) will stop as we learn to live with it.

Yes,so the question is which will help us get to that point of normal as you describe the quickest?
Is it vaccine passports or negative tests?

Vaccine passports as I understand it will mean everyone over 18 at the ground/nightclub and also traveling to and from the venue's will be less likely to place a burden on the health system if they come into contact with the virus due to the vaccine meaning they will only have mild symptoms.
It will also prevent unvaccinated going who have potential to catch it off other unvaccinated and possibly also vaccinated, which in turn will help the NHS because those people are more likely to need hospital treatment if they come into contact with the virus.

Testing should ensure everyone at the venue is negative for covid so likelihood of transmission at the venue is unlikely.
But I guess there is still potential for transmission outside the venue.
It also means people that have been vaccinated and therefore less likely to end up in hospital could actually not be able to attend because they have had a positive test.
We also have the issue of false positives which is a potential chink in the armour of the covid security of the venue.

It also seems a bit of a gamble for them to assume things will be ok in September especially as Chris whitty said it will be a difficult winter.

I was just starting to see the benefits of the vaccinated only going to the footy but starmer has thrown this Idea of negative testing in and I'm not sure about it.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Starmer appears to be opposing for the sake of it, evidenced by statements that it wont work, when we dont actually have a proposed implementation.

and because of that if it looks like its playing well among certain groups of voters, the government will ditch it without concern for the merits. they then might instead make it up to venues, and clubs with their community outlook will probably favour impose their own restriction, while say music venues wont. and we have a glorious mess.

I don't think its that much of a risk to say it wont work in most settings, think football would be easiest one at PL level, anything below that you have an issue.

For a start - who pays for everything needed to make it work? Nightclubs/Gov?

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

Starmer appears to be opposing for the sake of it, evidenced by statements that it wont work, when we dont actually have a proposed implementation.

and because of that if it looks like its playing well among certain groups of voters, the government will ditch it without concern for the merits. they then might instead make it up to venues, and clubs with their community outlook will probably favour impose their own restriction, while say music venues wont. and we have a glorious mess.

Yes that could explain why the premier League are working on there own app.
I imagine the premier League as an individual entity have already decided the direction they want to go rather than wait for definitive answers from the government which we know from experience either never materilse or become"we will leave it up to the individual to decide what's best".
Maybe kier starmer already knows this too so he is not taking too much of a risk by attacking the government on this.

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

Yes that could explain why the premier League are working on there own app.
I imagine the premier League as an individual entity have already decided the direction they want to go rather than wait for definitive answers from the government which we know from experience either never materilse or become"we will leave it up to the individual to decide what's best".
Maybe kier starmer already knows this too so he is not taking too much of a risk by attacking the government on this.

Is that right?

3 weeks tomorrow before the new season starts and no club has put anything on sale yet.

Interesting to see what happens next.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

Is that right?

3 weeks tomorrow before the new season starts and no club has put anything on sale yet.

Interesting to see what happens next.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Yes,another poster posted a story about the premier League working on there own app.
But I agree there doesn't seem to be definite information on what's going on from club or premier League sources.

The only thing I've seen is a polite request from the club on the website to ensure email details are up to date because they are sending out the digital STs in the next couple of days.

I'm guessing from an individual club perspective vaccine passports will be implemented if.
1.the government insists on it in the safety certificate.
2.the premier League clubs all vote on it and it's decided all clubs must use vaccine passports.
3.the club deems it necessary after performing a risk assessment.

But it would be nice to know if a final decision has been made yet.
I'm guessing the silence on the issue is because a final desicion hasnt been made and we will probably find out quite close to the first match.

 

[dazzer6666]

Yes,so the question is which will help us get to that point of normal as you describe the quickest?
Is it vaccine passports or negative tests?

Vaccine passports as I understand it will mean everyone over 18 at the ground/nightclub and also traveling to and from the venue's will be less likely to place a burden on the health system if they come into contact with the virus due to the vaccine meaning they will only have mild symptoms.
It will also prevent unvaccinated going who have potential to catch it off other unvaccinated and possibly also vaccinated, which in turn will help the NHS because those people are more likely to need hospital treatment if they come into contact with the virus.

Testing should ensure everyone at the venue is negative for covid so likelihood of transmission at the venue is unlikely.
But I guess there is still potential for transmission outside the venue.
It also means people that have been vaccinated and therefore less likely to end up in hospital could actually not be able to attend because they have had a positive test.
We also have the issue of false positives which is a potential chink in the armour of the covid security of the venue.

It also seems a bit of a gamble for them to assume things will be ok in September especially as Chris whitty said it will be a difficult winter.

I was just starting to see the benefits of the vaccinated only going to the footy but starmer has thrown this Idea of negative testing in and I'm not sure about it.

Surely a false negative is more of a chink in the armour than a false positive....

I can't see how the testing or passports will work unless the NHS data and tickets are linked electronically. Way too open for abuse as being used currently, and will cause utter chaos at point of entry.

If the PL is working on an app, I wonder if this will mean supplying evidence of jabs prior to ticket uploading.......

 

[dsr-burnley]

Largely, people who for whatever reason are unable to get vaccinated or are otherwise unusually vulnerable. And the minority of people who do get ill after being vaccinated. People from other countries not fortunate enough to have had access. And people who have, for reasons I do not begin to understand, chosen not to have it.

No, because the risks associated with flu are significantly lower than the risks associated with Covid.

It looks like the risks of Covid for people who have been vaccinated may be lower than the risks with flu. Certainly flu and pneumonia combined are killing more people than covid at present, up to 9th July anyway (later figures are not yet available).

Deaths from Covid in week ended 9th July = 183, with 147 where it's marked as the underlying cause. Deaths from flu and pneumonia in week ended 9th July = 1,166, with 254 as underlying cause. And flu and pneumonia aren't at a high point in a very virulent wave, and the majority of the covid deaths are of people who aren't vaccinated.

So it is a valid comparison, one way or another, to compare vaccine-era covid with flu.

 

[Stat Brother]

Bare in mind that BeHereNow is anti lockdown, anti vax and pro spreading white supremacist conspiracy theories.

Most people aren't like that, thank god.

He's do very well in the Trump states of America.

Absolutely no prizes for guessing which states are currently worse effected by Covid.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

It looks like the risks of Covid for people who have been vaccinated may be lower than the risks with flu. Certainly flu and pneumonia combined are killing more people than covid at present, up to 9th July anyway (later figures are not yet available).

Deaths from Covid in week ended 9th July = 183, with 147 where it's marked as the underlying cause. Deaths from flu and pneumonia in week ended 9th July = 1,166, with 254 as underlying cause. And flu and pneumonia aren't at a high point in a very virulent wave, and the majority of the covid deaths are of people who aren't vaccinated.

So it is a valid comparison, one way or another, to compare vaccine-era covid with flu.

Picking a single week of the year and comparing two numbers is not an appropriate method for comparing risks associated with two different diseases.

If you want a short boring answer - I could imagine restrictions on football attendances etc. being justified during extremely bad flu epidemics, as have been experienced historically but not recently.

In the context of this thread (not your post specifically) it's an obvious piece of whataboutary with no basis in any applied thought or study of the relative effectiveness of flu vaccines, mortality in different age groups, variation in flu strains or any other of an enormous list of possible considerations you could come up with.

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

Surely a false negative is more of a chink in the armour than a false positive....

I can't see how the testing or passports will work unless the NHS data and tickets are linked electronically. Way too open for abuse as being used currently, and will cause utter chaos at point of entry.

If the PL is working on an app, I wonder if this will mean supplying evidence of jabs prior to ticket uploading.......

Yes sorry your quite right,false negative would be a chink in the security as it means infected people would be in the ground/nightclub.
False positives could mean healthy people being not allowed to go and also healthy vaccinated people not to go which would be a bit ridiculous.

And yes I agree I think it will all need to come together on a digital platform but it's also worth mentioning that one of the issues in Israel with the green pass was hacking or false passes being sold and uploaded on the dark web.
It was a small issue and certainly more difficult than obtaining paper ones but still was an issue none the less.
And yes I agree,I wonder if it could be something along the lines of vaccine evidence before uploading.
The fact the premier seem to have decided to design there own passport makes me think they wanted something custom made specifically for football with regards to ticketing and turnstiles maybe.
I think things will start to become clearer as the digital STs start to be sent to peoples emails.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Picking a single week of the year and comparing two numbers is not an appropriate method for comparing risks associated with two different diseases.

If you want a short boring answer - I could imagine restrictions on football attendances etc. being justified during extremely bad flu epidemics, as have been experienced historically but not recently.

In the context of this thread (not your post specifically) it's an obvious piece of whataboutary with no basis in any applied thought or study of the relative effectiveness of flu vaccines, mortality in different age groups, variation in flu strains or any other of an enormous list of possible considerations you could come up with.

All I am saying is that comparisons with flu are valid. Especially in the context of assessing the degree of lockdown thought necessary for covid compared with the degree of lockdown thought necessary for flu.

If you prefer, I could look at the last 12 weeks since 17th April when flu and pneumonia have been the primary cause of 3,157 deaths and covid has been the primary cause of 1,166 deaths. It's a comparison, that's all. Some people appear to be of the belief that just because covid is a different disease from flu, then comparisons between the two are no more relevant than comparisons between covid and ingrowing toenails. Not true - in some respects comparisons are valuable, in other respects they aren't.

 

[BeHereNow]

Where's your evidence that you don't need a vaccine if you've had Covid?. Can you tell me how long your immunity lasts?

"Whatever they are calling it this week" suggests you don't believe it's a real thing. Do you? Because, if you do you, you know exactly what it's called.

Do you know what I think? I think you're one of those that still can't accept what happened and wants there to be an actual time machine to go back to 2019. You're one of those who won't pause your own life, even for a second, to help others. Who thinks that this is all one big made up thing, even though it's abundantly clear that Johnson couldn't organise the proverbial piss up in a brewery. let alone be complicit in a world wide conspiracy. That you've never looked at the positive vaccination data without thinking it was a lie. That you don't wear a mask and when challenged, mutter something about "having a condition".

And all the time that sort of poor critical thinking is excused everyone's suffering will carry on because the pandemic will continue and, even if people don't lose loved ones here so much, they will be dropping in their millions in the third world.

But you go about with your arrogant "immunity" and inability to wear a face covering for five minutes

Again, making up things in your head, as usual, I didn’t say I didn’t NEED the vaccine.

I just wonder why they also seem to make the terms ‘Covid’ and ‘Coronavirus’ interchangeable. Surely, if we were concerned about the one virus, why do we always see ‘Died within 28 days of a positive Coronavirus test’? Why not just a ‘Covid’ test? Coronavirus comes round every year, so if they’re adding that on…

Masks don’t work, so not sure why you’re so Nazi about them.

I definitely don’t wear masks in public anymore, to pretend people living normal lives is somehow killing thousands of people is despicable propaganda of the highest order.

I get the feeling you’ve never actually spoken to someone in person who doesn’t agree with all this stuff and that you turn everyone you don’t agree with into a bogeyman, if you watch GB News, you’ll see that my views are quite commonplace.

Apart from the football, my life for the past 18 months has pretty much been the same as the previous 18 months actually. This isn’t about me, this about millions of people being frightened into thinking it’s worse than it is, but you know, that’s why the government spent millions on the fear porn.

Maybe watch the video in my signature before you come up with your dickheadish assumptions.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Again, making up things in your head, as usual, I didn’t say I didn’t NEED the vaccine.

I just wonder why they also seem to make the terms ‘Covid’ and ‘Coronavirus’ interchangeable. Surely, if we were concerned about the one virus, why do we always see ‘Died within 28 days of a positive Coronavirus test’? Why not just a ‘Covid’ test? Coronavirus comes round every year, so if they’re adding that on…

Masks don’t work, so not sure why you’re so Nazi about them.

I definitely don’t wear masks in public anymore, to pretend people living normal lives is somehow killing thousands of people is despicable propaganda of the highest order.

I get the feeling you’ve never actually spoken to someone in person who doesn’t agree with all this stuff and that you turn everyone you don’t agree with into a bogeyman, if you watch GB News, you’ll see that my views are quite commonplace.

Apart from the football, my life for the past 18 months has pretty much been the same as the previous 18 months actually. This isn’t about me, this about millions of people being frightened into thinking it’s worse than it is, but you know, that’s why the government spent millions on the fear porn.

Maybe watch the video in my signature before you come up with your dickheadish assumptions.

OK you got me. Second best parody account on here, finally Crodo has a challenger. You win a scholarship to the Sasha Baron Cohen School of Terrible Parody. You'll have to wear a mask on your way there though

 

[e77]

Again, making up things in your head, as usual, I didn’t say I didn’t NEED the vaccine.

I just wonder why they also seem to make the terms ‘Covid’ and ‘Coronavirus’ interchangeable. Surely, if we were concerned about the one virus, why do we always see ‘Died within 28 days of a positive Coronavirus test’? Why not just a ‘Covid’ test? Coronavirus comes round every year, so if they’re adding that on…

Masks don’t work, so not sure why you’re so Nazi about them.

I definitely don’t wear masks in public anymore, to pretend people living normal lives is somehow killing thousands of people is despicable propaganda of the highest order.

I get the feeling you’ve never actually spoken to someone in person who doesn’t agree with all this stuff and that you turn everyone you don’t agree with into a bogeyman, if you watch GB News, you’ll see that my views are quite commonplace.

Apart from the football, my life for the past 18 months has pretty much been the same as the previous 18 months actually. This isn’t about me, this about millions of people being frightened into thinking it’s worse than it is, but you know, that’s why the government spent millions on the fear porn.

Maybe watch the video in my signature before you come up with your dickheadish assumptions.

I was going to ignore you but then I noticed you referenced the Nazis and cited GB News as a reputable source of information in your reply. This has obvious brought me, and I am sure many others, round to your point of view.

 

[BeHereNow]

Largely, people who for whatever reason are unable to get vaccinated or are otherwise unusually vulnerable. And the minority of people who do get ill after being vaccinated. People from other countries not fortunate enough to have had access. And people who have, for reasons I do not begin to understand, chosen not to have it.

No, because the risks associated with flu are significantly lower than the risks associated with Covid.

So you admit that passing flu around leads to killing people, but because it’s less risky, you don’t need to worry about it?

You also know that the average age of Covid deaths is 83.3 years old. Is that so much lower than flu?

Says here that flu added 50,000 extra deaths, no? So, why didn’t we have restrictions then?