Jump to content

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, scotty said:

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.

And in Ireland 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2021 at 9:44 PM, 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

It's not a trial drug.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no evidence that attending an outdoor football match leads to Covid transmission rise. The Euros saw a spike in cases due to people watching it together indoors. Not by attending matches. There's also no evidence for 10,000 and above. This is a random figure. The only example of an outdoor event which increased transmission and Covid rates was a music festival in Cornwall with 50,000 people and had a tented village. If they're trying to cajole the unvaccinated to get a vaccine then they should say that is the reason. This is a government that is trying to make itself look like it's doing something and completely missing the mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Arete said:

There's no evidence that attending an outdoor football match leads to Covid transmission rise. The Euros saw a spike in cases due to people watching it together indoors. Not by attending matches. There's also no evidence for 10,000 and above. This is a random figure. The only example of an outdoor event which increased transmission and Covid rates was a music festival in Cornwall with 50,000 people and had a tented village. If they're trying to cajole the unvaccinated to get a vaccine then they should say that is the reason. This is a government that is trying to make itself look like it's doing something and completely missing the mark.

BMJ-part of the difficulty is the lack of ability to gather evidence.

 

>Just 28 positive cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified among more than 58 000 people who attended nine large events in April and May included in a pilot programme set up to examine the risks of transmission and how they can be reduced.

But although the evaluation of the first phase of the government’s Events Research Programme found “no substantial outbreaks,”1 it conceded that it was a challenge “to generate robust, generalisable evidence of the transmission risk associated with particular events” because of the low prevalence of the virus at the time and the low uptake of PCR testing before and after the events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Arete said:

There's no evidence that attending an outdoor football match leads to Covid transmission rise. The Euros saw a spike in cases due to people watching it together indoors. Not by attending matches. There's also no evidence for 10,000 and above. This is a random figure. The only example of an outdoor event which increased transmission and Covid rates was a music festival in Cornwall with 50,000 people and had a tented village. If they're trying to cajole the unvaccinated to get a vaccine then they should say that is the reason. This is a government that is trying to make itself look like it's doing something and completely missing the mark.

This is the reason:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/08/study-ties-covid-vaccines-lower-transmission-rates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, westertonjagfan said:

BMJ-part of the difficulty is the lack of ability to gather evidence.

 

>Just 28 positive cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified among more than 58 000 people who attended nine large events in April and May included in a pilot programme set up to examine the risks of transmission and how they can be reduced.

But although the evaluation of the first phase of the government’s Events Research Programme found “no substantial outbreaks,”1 it conceded that it was a challenge “to generate robust, generalisable evidence of the transmission risk associated with particular events” because of the low prevalence of the virus at the time and the low uptake of PCR testing before and after the events.

Not too sure when BMJ wrote that but we've had a month of full stadiums in English league and no large increase in cases in England which is evidence that football attendance has little impact on Covid transmission. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

This is correct. Getting vaccinated reduces your chance of getting severe Covid or transmitting. I'd prefer going to Firhill with 100% of the crowd vaccinated. But that's not going to happen. My point is there is little risk in going to the football. The unvaccinated will get their Covid indoors in the pub afterwards. If the government want to encourage more people to get vaccinated by restricting access to football for those unvaccinated then they should say that's why they're doing it instead of making it seem like there having to do this to prevent more transmission. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Arete said:

There's no evidence that attending an outdoor football match leads to Covid transmission rise. The Euros saw a spike in cases due to people watching it together indoors. Not by attending matches. There's also no evidence for 10,000 and above. This is a random figure. The only example of an outdoor event which increased transmission and Covid rates was a music festival in Cornwall with 50,000 people and had a tented village. If they're trying to cajole the unvaccinated to get a vaccine then they should say that is the reason. This is a government that is trying to make itself look like it's doing something and completely missing the mark.

You obviously have a great deal of data. Is your analysis based only on data from Scotland? I'm curious because of  the specific reference to Cornwall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the medical/pandemic aspect,  there might be an interesting comparison with the implicit agreement to be searched at the turnstiles. In Germany (where fans tend to be more boisterous than at Firhill, even at "lower" grades of football) you either agree to this or don't gain entry. AFAIK nobody has ever objected. (The police, who attend major matches, are armed, btw.)

In much the same way as we generally carry fistfuls of cards - credit, driving licence, season ticket, etc. - but express shock and horror when someone suggests ID cards, is objecting to a vaccine record not the same emotive rather than rational response?

(On a personal note, if I'm travelling to a country with tropical diseases, I ensure that I have a record of my vaccines with me, just in case it's useful for medical reference. That might be a potential employer, rather than a medical practitioner.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Fearchar said:

Apart from the medical/pandemic aspect,  there might be an interesting comparison with the implicit agreement to be searched at the turnstiles. In Germany (where fans tend to be more boisterous than at Firhill, even at "lower" grades of football) you either agree to this or don't gain entry. AFAIK nobody has ever objected. (The police, who attend major matches, are armed, btw.)

In much the same way as we generally carry fistfuls of cards - credit, driving licence, season ticket, etc. - but express shock and horror when someone suggests ID cards, is objecting to a vaccine record not the same emotive rather than rational response?

(On a personal note, if I'm travelling to a country with tropical diseases, I ensure that I have a record of my vaccines with me, just in case it's useful for medical reference. That might be a potential employer, rather than a medical practitioner.)

I was thinking exactly the same about photographic I’d. You can’t get on a plane without these days even on domestic flights but everybody does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arete said:

Not too sure when BMJ wrote that but we've had a month of full stadiums in English league and no large increase in cases in England which is evidence that football attendance has little impact on Covid transmission. 

This information is taken from here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/events-research-programme-phase-i-findings/events-research-programme-phase-i-findings

The 'low uptake of PCR testing before and after the events' is mentioned in 1.6 OBSERVATION 6 where it notes that only 15% of the 58,000 attendees returned both pre- ad post-event tests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic but there was a letter in the Herald this week about face coverings and it made me wonder what the law (as opposed to the recommendation) is with regards to the fitba'.  The current regulations (updated 3 days ago) in the SG's website list 23 situations where face coverings are mandatory by law. They include "sports stadiums".  No mention of indoors or outdoors or both. Looking at crowd shots at Hampden last night and other TV highlights suggests virtually no-one is wearing them. Is there a mass defiance here or is it a case that the regulations aren't understood? There is a deafening silence from the authorities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BowenBoys said:

You obviously have a great deal of data. Is your analysis based only on data from Scotland? I'm curious because of  the specific reference to Cornwall.

this is a lot of cases for Cornwall ….


Cornwall Council has said 4,700 cases could be linked to the Boardmasters festival, which attracted about 50,000 people to the small seaside town of Newquay this month.

Share this post


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

this is a lot of cases for Cornwall ….


Cornwall Council has said 4,700 cases could be linked to the Boardmasters festival, which attracted about 50,000 people to the small seaside town of Newquay this month.

Sure, I get that.

What's under discussion is measures being introduced by the Scottish Government. I'm just trying  to establish that people making claims about the efficacy of these measures are basing their claims on purely Scottish data which is what the SG will be  doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, a f kincaid said:

Slightly off topic but there was a letter in the Herald this week about face coverings and it made me wonder what the law (as opposed to the recommendation) is with regards to the fitba'.  The current regulations (updated 3 days ago) in the SG's website list 23 situations where face coverings are mandatory by law. They include "sports stadiums".  No mention of indoors or outdoors or both. Looking at crowd shots at Hampden last night and other TV highlights suggests virtually no-one is wearing them. Is there a mass defiance here or is it a case that the regulations aren't understood? There is a deafening silence from the authorities. 

I was as Hampden last night, did a lateral flow before and I reckon mask wearing was only about 10%. Disappointing particularly with the complete shambles at the turnstiles with vast numbers missing the kick off by about 20 minutes. We queued from well before kick off and only just got in to "hear" the goal from the stairwell. 

It was a visual inspection of the ticket rather than scan, the majority of the fans outside were unmasked and pretty vocal. Little or no stewarding. 

No point in the SFA setting guidelines and not ensuring that they are effective.

"No point in the SFA " also stands alone as a statement in my opinion.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At Firhill last week the steward near me was constantly reminding people to wear a mask if they were moving about Firhill. But when they were at their seat it was ok not to wear one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers.  That's my very point. They're not SFA/SPFL regulations. If the SG website is up to date then they're the law. There is nothing about only having to wear them when moving about either.  Who briefs the stewards I wonder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, BowenBoys said:

You obviously have a great deal of data. Is your analysis based only on data from Scotland? I'm curious because of  the specific reference to Cornwall.

I'm not aware of data specific to Scottish football matches. Probably some data available around the Euros and Scotland but from what I understand the increase in cases was more connected to people coming together indoors. I think the Scottish government will use whatever info is available from elsewhere. The big increase in cases in Cornwall correlate to the music Festival. But I don't think you can compare an event which includes overnight camping and tens of thousands coming into the area from other parts of the UK with a match at Firhill or any Scottish ground. Scotland currently has case rates double that of England. We're both attending football matches but only Scotland has schools back in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2021 at 11:18 AM, laukat said:

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.

The way the legislation is set out that the threshold is set by government but businesses (clubs) that fall outside can now legally implement it for their own premises (Firhill).

I have no issue having my jags or (as with other vaccinations) providing proof for entering a country.  This though is too far, what next? Can’t take a bus/train or a job without a Covid passport? This is already happening in Croatia and France.

What happens when (as is already being muted) you have to start paying for the regular (3 or 6 monthly) boosters if your not in a “risk” category, we have a 2 tier society.

Football and society is for all, no one asks you to ensure you have a FluJag or Measles jag before you get in a ground, or check your hands to see your not transmitting E-Coli as your a manky *******. Folks rights to choose must be respected and not made parrias of 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, a f kincaid said:

Cheers.  That's my very point. They're not SFA/SPFL regulations. If the SG website is up to date then they're the law. There is nothing about only having to wear them when moving about either.  Who briefs the stewards I wonder. 

If it’s Scottish Government’s legislation I’d suggest they look to their own MP’s 1st to enforce it

0CE62CA5-AF13-4173-B29B-8E150BB2B512.png

Share this post


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

The way the legislation is set out that the threshold is set by government but businesses (clubs) that fall outside can now legally implement it for their own premises (Firhill).

I have no issue having my jags or (as with other vaccinations) providing proof for entering a country.  This though is too far, what next? Can’t take a bus/train or a job without a Covid passport? This is already happening in Croatia and France.

What happens when (as is already being muted) you have to start paying for the regular (3 or 6 monthly) boosters if your not in a “risk” category, we have a 2 tier society.

Football and society is for all, no one asks you to ensure you have a FluJag or Measles jag before you get in a ground, or check your hands to see your not transmitting E-Coli as your a manky *******. Folks rights to choose must be respected and not made parrias of 

 

What about the rights of those people they might infect ?  As has been said in this thread, we are subject to many regulations in our daily lives that people accept as a reasonable cost of being part of society. This is just another one.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lenziejag said:

What about the rights of those people they might infect ?  As has been said in this thread, we are subject to many regulations in our daily lives that people accept as a reasonable cost of being part of society. This is just another one.  

Having the vaccination does not stop you catching it or transmitting it, the same as the flu vaccination, it limits the transmission level and severity if caught. So if your vaccinated (as I am) you’ve protected yourself firstly and limited the spread secondary.


2000 people die almost every week in UK from the Flu why are we not legislating for that?

This is a dangerous step towards a 2 tier system in Scotland, what’s next can’t claim dole, get a bank loan or get a doctors appointment if you can’t provide your medical history? What’s next to be added?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Norgethistle said:

Having the vaccination does not stop you catching it or transmitting it, the same as the flu vaccination, it limits the transmission level and severity if caught. So if your vaccinated (as I am) you’ve protected yourself firstly and limited the spread secondary.


2000 people die almost every week in UK from the Flu why are we not legislating for that?

This is a dangerous step towards a 2 tier system in Scotland, what’s next can’t claim dole, get a bank loan or get a doctors appointment if you can’t provide your medical history? What’s next to be added?

Well you can’t get a bank loan if you can’t provide photographic identification and proof of address and if you don’t pass a credit check.  You can’t claim dole if you can’t prove you spent so many hours a week looking for work. I think you have to register with a gp before you can get an appointment. 
I suppose that we don’t legislate for flu is because the infection rate is so much lower than Covid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2021 at 10:25 AM, 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  

I’ve recently had the incident in my workplace where a double vaccinated off-shore employee was infected by another double vaccinated employee. The vaccination does not stop infection or transmission it merely limits it. 

Testing (free not the £300 I’ve had to pay to get back here) and rapid tracing of infected is far more effective than scanning a QR code to state you had a jag 9 weeks ago

Share this post


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

I’ve recently had the incident in my workplace where a double vaccinated off-shore employee was infected by another double vaccinated employee. The vaccination does not stop infection or transmission it merely limits it. 

Testing (free not the £300 I’ve had to pay to get back here) and rapid tracing of infected is far more effective than scanning a QR code to state you had a jag 9 weeks ago

So are you ok with that type of regulation ? 

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.
×