Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So I'm sure you've seen in the news the Scottish Gov proposals around V-passports for large events, e.g. football matches, nightclubs etc. My question is, how would each of us feel if this were brought in at Firhill?

I ask since as far as I can see, there's already been a fair backlash with fans e-mailing their respective clubs to say they won't be attending if this were a requirement. I personally am also in that boat, and have already e-mailed Thistle to state the same. My reasons being

- wasn't required during EURO 2020 (e.g. at Hampden)

- it's a trial drug with no evidence of long-term effectiveness against disease, or its infection, carrying or transmission

- our medical history & who we share it with is no-one's business but our own. We don't need anyone's permission to live our lives, especially from the government.

And if you're also in agreement, could be an idea for a few more of us to get in touch with the club to make it clear where we stand on the issue going forward? Cheers

Edited by Ferris Bueller
Typo
  • Like 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a V-Pisspoor idea.

Isn't somebody more likely to get infected on a smaller, enclosed space like a crowded bus or train, or in a busy shop than in an essentially open stadium where fresh air constantly circulates (with two obvious exceptions, not so far from Firhill)? So, V-passports for almost everything that everybody does  is the way forward!

Yeah, bring it on!

Edited by Jaggernaut
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we're not likely to need them for attending Firhill (10k fans) and I've had both I think it's a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don’t see the need for it either but it makes no difference to me. Iv had the vaccine and I trust it’s safe enough. And if it’s what’s needed to keep watching thistle home and away then it’s a price worth paying. Don’t know what emailing thistle to voice any disapproval is going to achieve as if it is made official it will be out-with the clubs control. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I have interpreted the outlines for v passport correctly then there should not be any need for them at Firhill which is an all seated stadium with attendances not likely to exceed 10k .

Cant understand why the SG is not giving the option of negative test for those not double vaccinated or those not wishing to be vaccinated due to personal freedom of choice.

Edited by Anniesland Jag
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I've no concerns proving I have had both jabs if it means I can go to Firhill (or any other ground for that matter).

We have just come through  a season that we couldn't go to football games and I wouldn't want to have to go back to that if another lockdown is introduced. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be the subject of a vote in the Scottish Parliament. If you have strong views on the matter you should contact your MSP. I don't see the point of burdening our clubs overstretched staff when the matter is beyond their control. The proposal is unlikely to affect them anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BowenBoys said:

This will be the subject of a vote in the Scottish Parliament. If you have strong views on the matter you should contact your MSP. I don't see the point of burdening our clubs overstretched staff when the matter is beyond their control. The proposal is unlikely to affect them anyway.

Yep, that's what's next. I see there's now going to be a vote on it - I just e-mailed to make my position clear going forward, as a number of other fans have with their clubs in the event we're lucky enough for there to be some form of consultation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ferris Bueller said:

So I'm sure you've seen in the news the Scottish Gov proposals around V-passports for large events, e.g. football matches, nightclubs etc. My question is, how would each of us feel if this were brought in at Firhill?

I ask since as far as I can see, there's already been a fair backlash with fans e-maiing their respective clubs to say they won't be attending if this were a requirement. I personally am also in that boat, and have already e-mailed Thistle to state the same. My reasons being

- wasn't required during EURO 2020 (e.g. at Hampden)

- it's a trial drug with no evidence of long-term effectiveness against disease, or its infection, carrying or transmission

- our medical history & who we share it with is no-one's business but our own. We don't need anyone's permission to live our lives, especially from the government.

And if you're also in agreement, could be an idea for a few more of us to get in touch with the club to make it clear where we stand on the issue going forward? Cheers

Couldn’t disagree more …..some people seem to think they have a right to infect other people with covid as some kind of human  right they don’t 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Couldn’t disagree more …..some people seem to think they have a right to infect other people with covid as some kind of human  right they don’t 

Fair enough but check my second bullet point - it's just a pity there's no evidence of its effect on spread of the disease, only symptoms. I realise this isn't the place for a full blown debate on the whole wider issue but think it makes little sense given it's not proposed for more enclosed public spaces e.g. transport

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ferris Bueller said:

Fair enough but check my second bullet point - it's just a pity there's no evidence of its effect on spread of the disease, only symptoms. I realise this isn't the place for a full blown debate on the whole wider issue but think it makes little sense given it's not proposed for more enclosed public spaces e.g. transport

I don’t have the time or inclination to list all the studies that show the effects of the vaccines on transmission or prevention but for example this is  just from half an hour ago …..I don’t want you giving me long covid.

People who have had two vaccine doses are not only less likely to catch coronavirus, they are also less likely to develop long Covid, a study has found. 

Using data collected by the Zoe Covid-19 study, which uses an app to track symptomatic infections, researchers at King's College London analysed how many people went on to catch the virus after either their first or second jab. 

Between December and July, 0.5 per cent of the more than 1.2m users of the Zoe app who received their first dose subsequently tested positive, while 0.2 per cent of the 971,000 who received their second also fell ill.

Among those who received two jabs and continued to use the Zoe app for more than a month after they were first infected, 5.2 per cent said their symptoms lasted for 28 days or more. That compared with a rate of 11.4 per cent among a control group who had not received any doses of vaccine.

The odds of long Covid after post-vaccination infection were therefore “roughly halved by having two doses”, the researchers said in a paper published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases on Wednesday.

“Almost all individual symptoms of Covid-19 were less common in vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants, and more people in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated groups were completely asymptomatic”, the researchers added.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with @BowenBoys its not one for the club. They have to operate within the rules set and its parliament that sets the rules so thats where the complaint should go.

When you add that Thistle are unlikely to be impacted by a passport for for crowds higher than 10000 when we rarely get crowds over 3000 this is really only going to impact a handful of clubs. One of those effected (Sevco) are probably responsible for the massive increase in positive cases from going on the rampage through the city centre so I have little sympathy for them.

I'm not a big fan of sharing health information in general but we live in exceptional times. Everyone still has a personal choice fully aware of the consequences. You can choose to get vaccinated and share your passport to get access to a football game or conversely not get vaccinated and watch it on a stream. As @javeajag has already an individuals right not to be vaccinated does not give them the right to infect others.

Where I do have more of an issue with the vaccine passports is in regards to those not being offered a vaccine. For example kids under 16 have no access to a vaccine so does that mean they cannot attend? Where is their choice?

I also have concerns about what venues will be subject to vaccine passports. Completely get indoor venues such as night clubs etc being subject to them.  However in general football grounds are open air venues so if they are to apply there they should probably apply to other outdoor events that have lots of people in attendance.

So does a political protest or an orange order march now either need to restrict attendees or check for vaccination status? What about pre and post game celebrations? The sharp rise in covid from the euros wasn't really from attendance at the game it was from fans congregating pre and post game in pubs and city squares.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Ferris Bueller said:

Yep, that's what's next. I see there's now going to be a vote on it - I just e-mailed to make my position clear going forward, as a number of other fans have with their clubs in the event we're lucky enough for there to be some form of consultation.

From the outset it was subject to a vote in parliament. You're implying that the vote was introduced subsequently.

https://www.gov.scot/news/covid-19-vaccination-certification/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, laukat said:

...

Where I do have more of an issue with the vaccine passports is in regards to those not being offered a vaccine. For example kids under 16 have no access to a vaccine so does that mean they cannot attend? Where is their choice?

...

Children and those ineligible for vaccination are exempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, BowenBoys said:

From the outset it was subject to a vote in parliament. You're implying that the vote was introduced subsequently.

https://www.gov.scot/news/covid-19-vaccination-certification/

Then I stand corrected, just much of what I saw yesterday implied it was pretty much a done deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58412832

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Utterly pointless piece of legislature if it passes as (a) effectiveness of being double jabbed over time reduces - down towards 60-70% after 6 months - and (b) new variants are coming on stream with the new ‘mu’ variant being a current cause for concern.

However if it’s the new law then we’re duty bound to comply irrespective of personal opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, gianlucatoni said:

Utterly pointless piece of legislature if it passes as (a) effectiveness of being double jabbed over time reduces - down towards 60-70% after 6 months - and (b) new variants are coming on stream with the new ‘mu’ variant being a current cause for concern.

However if it’s the new law then we’re duty bound to comply irrespective of personal opinion.

60% to 70% effectiveness is still good. I don't understand why people expect perfection. It's like being against the law requiring the wearing of seatbelts or motorcycle helmets because they are only 70% (or whatever) effective at saving you in a high speed accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having retired from a career in heath care and having family members still on the front line, I am all in favour of anything that can restrict the spread of Covid.

I know of at least two close associates that did not stick to guidance because it "interfered" with their freedom who subsequently became infected with Covid and required hospital admission. One also infected family members.

It is up to individuals whether the want to have the vaccine, but my concern would be the effect of passing on infection to others.

Before attending matches I currently take a lateral flow test, it may not be 100% accurate but I believe in trying to do my bit to protect others around me. 

I have had both jags and am in possession  of a vaccine certificate. I have no issues with it being required to attend some events. It is unlikely that it will be required by many of us for Thistle games this season unless circumstances change.

Having considered the consequences of infecting others ,  I will do all that I can to protect others. If this includes showing my vaccination status before entry to some events, I will happily do so.

I realise that others will have a different opinion, which they are entitled to.

Attendance at events which require vaccine status certificates is not mandatory after all.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Duke Gekantawa said:

60% to 70% effectiveness is still good. I don't understand why people expect perfection. It's like being against the law requiring the wearing of seatbelts or motorcycle helmets because they are only 70% (or whatever) effective at saving you in a high speed accident.

Go along with that. The civil liberty argument tends to be a very present tense type of argument. Give a year or so and all these so called draconian measures are generally accepted. Whether it's the forced wearing of crash helmets and seatbelts or the smoking ban in pubs, whatever, the initial upset soon moves on to a general acceptance. Whether that's a good or bad thing is largely irrelevant, it's just what happens. I'm just generalising as I realise the OP is arguing from a slightly different perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Go along with that. The civil liberty argument tends to be a very present tense type of argument. Give a year or so and all these so called draconian measures are generally accepted. Whether it's the forced wearing of crash helmets and seatbelts or the smoking ban in pubs, whatever, the initial upset soon moves on to a general acceptance. Whether that's a good or bad thing is largely irrelevant, it's just what happens. I'm just generalising as I realise the OP is arguing from a slightly different perspective. 

No he's not. :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Anniesland Jag said:

If I have interpreted the outlines for v passport correctly then there should not be any need for them at Firhill which is an all seated stadium with attendances not likely to exceed 10k .

Cant understand why the SG is not giving the option of negative test for those not double vaccinated or those not wishing to be vaccinated due to personal freedom of choice.

I think the reasoning is to encourage people to get double vaccinated- especially under 40’s

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Ferris Bueller said:

So I'm sure you've seen in the news the Scottish Gov proposals around V-passports for large events, e.g. football matches, nightclubs etc. My question is, how would each of us feel if this were brought in at Firhill?

I ask since as far as I can see, there's already been a fair backlash with fans e-mailing their respective clubs to say they won't be attending if this were a requirement. I personally am also in that boat, and have already e-mailed Thistle to state the same. My reasons being

- wasn't required during EURO 2020 (e.g. at Hampden)

- it's a trial drug with no evidence of long-term effectiveness against disease, or its infection, carrying or transmission

- our medical history & who we share it with is no-one's business but our own. We don't need anyone's permission to live our lives, especially from the government.

And if you're also in agreement, could be an idea for a few more of us to get in touch with the club to make it clear where we stand on the issue going forward? Cheers

There is certainly evidence that vaccination reduces severe illness and death significantly. As far as sharing that particular information, pretty much every time you meet someone you haven’t seen since lockdown eased it is something you ask. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I think the reasoning is to encourage people to get double vaccinated- especially under 40’s

It certainly worked in France, where the necessity to have a vaccine passport to get into clubs, events and the like resulted in a massive uptake of the vaccine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By sandy
      Get yourself down to the JH concourse for the Open Day. Atmosphere building nicely with lots of activities for the young ones.
      Open training session at 12:00, first team signing 1:30 and Manager and Board Q&A at 2:30.
       

    • By CameronMcGhee
      Could any Jags fans help me out with my dissertation project on safe standing for the University of Stirling. I need as many fans as possible to fill out the survey.
      Thanks for your help!
      https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/XVC2BHZ 
    • By Lambies Lost Doo
      What's the feeling on the board for this game? I'm going and excited about this one. A must win. A BIG game. We have a chance of doing this.
       
      I'm staggered it is not sold out. Prices are reasonable. Would love a 50+k crowd to give the players a lift.
       
      Tickets still on sale up to kick off.
×