Was Big Sam Right?

I can’t find the paper I read on it - but here is an article:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.runnersworld.com/health-injuries/amp33822804/exercise-myocarditis-and-covid-19/

comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 7 seconds ago
The relevance, as I understood it, was that a two week break would help drive the number of players who could potentially catch covid down. If you don’t have covid, then of course there is no problem with undertaking exercise. If the number of players catching covid increases (which seems to be happening), then the chances of players developing problems from strenuous exercise after recovering from covid could also increase.

Or in other words, the two week break - to attempt to drive numbers down, is a preventative measure.

Also, if a club (any club) had only a few players infected, then those players can isolate and recover fully, even taking an extended break after recovery in terms of training. One or two, while that still isn’t ideal, would have a minimal impact on that clubs ability to use other players in its squad and fulfil fixture commitments while those infected players could fully recover.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm, okay that’s a fair point.

Though I still don’t agree. How many players would a two week break prevent from catching it?

And is there any evidence for this issue apart from a comment by Steve Bruce?

As a side note, it’s bizarre that simply asking someone to explain their post can lead to such a meltdown on here. People just seem to take any challenge of their view as a personal attack.

How many players would a two week break prevent from catching it?

—————————

As things stand, the numbers of players testing positive are increasing, so something has to be done. Whether that’s a change in training methods, more limits in interacting with non-playing staff, or a complete temporary suspension of the game for a certain period of time. Something has to change, because changing nothing will just see an exponential growth of those numbers of positive cases.

The danger with simply having a two week break is that it depends on everyone complying to an imposed isolation (lockdown) in order to drive the numbers down. Also, the danger with simply having a two week break, is that after that time has elapsed, if nothing else is done, nothing else is changed, then the numbers will just creep up again once they are back playing.

A two week break on its own is simply not enough. Just as a lockdown in more general society is (clearly) not enough to overcome this.

Ripleys, don’t entirely agree with that.

The testing programme alongside zero evidence of transmissions in the actual fixtures means that exponential growth through football itself is unlikely to say the least.

Cases are rising because they’re rising in society - football is just reflecting that and stopping for two weeks isn’t going to change anything.

They’ll carry on training, so the opportunity for new cases will be constant.

The subject of lockdowns is a tricky one because they seem to have a negligible effect, but that’s a different subject altogether... on the subject of a football break, I just don’t see any logic about why it would help.

The issue about long term damage for people exercising was a really interesting one and it was a shame Edin reacted the way he did as I’d be interested in learning more.

But if he’s right about it taking months and not weeks, then I don’t see how football can fix that without abandoning the season.

The rise in positive cases is happening, and I agree that that is a reflection on what is happening in society more generally.

If a two week break was to happen, but players continued to train, then having a two week break would be utterly pointless! I agree with you - in that respect, the opportunity for new cases absolutely would be constant.

Just as something has to be done in society more generally, something has to be done in football. It doesn’t exist in a bubble. Players don’t exist in a bubble. They are just as likely to catch it from someone outside of football as they are from a teammate, staff colleague, etc.

The point is however, they are catching it. The rigorous testing programme - all that achieves (and it is incredibly important that it does) is to identify infected players before symptoms start to show.

Lockdown’s having a negligible effect is a tricky one!

I recommend everyone gets their 1 hour of exercise

But the testing programme therefore helps reduce the spread, by definition?

If anything, keeping it going and testing them so frequently actually reduces the potential for those individuals to spread the virus... is there an argument to say that the benefit of that programme outweighs the negative of getting the squad together each week?

If you stopped players going into training for two weeks, what would that actually help in terms of numbers, and could that be offset by the spread caused by players who aren’t being tested in that timeframe?

That’s a totally valid point. It’s why I said that if a two week break were to happen, then it would not be enough on its own. Players would effectively have to go into isolation for that period as well.

Football has been effectively granted “key worker” status. Unfortunately, this is the battle the country is facing overall. It is key worker environments that are seeing the biggest rises. Schools, supermarkets, care homes, hospitals. Football, it seems, is following that trend. But we can’t shut down these places (with the notable exception of schools, and, well, indeed, football!

Ripleys

Sadly I think a lot of the lessons and understanding for this virus will be found after it’s gone / dealt with.

comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 21 hours ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 26 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 18 minutes ago
I love how 'circuit breaker' is now a term used by people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Where’s your degree Masters in Infectious Diseases?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not the one using the term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The ones who coined the term are medical professionals though?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Are they? Not sure, I’m not the one proposing we need one based on something I’ve invented in my own head, with no actual evidence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cases in the PL have now reached a record high. Cases are increasing rapidly in the PL industry, is that not quantifiable evidence enough that we need a two week circuit breaker to help control the spread of the virus amongst footballers, like I originally said?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No!