Football fans must be double jabbed to enter stadiums

Frozen Horse said:
It does discriminate on health grounds as some fans won't be able to have the jab.

Yet we accept some discrimination on health grounds universally: I take it no one objects to there being a minimum eyesight test to drive, for example?

The question is not do we accept this, but where we draw the line?

I also don't think anyone who couldn't go for this reason would want football to go closed-doors again just because they couldn't attend. In their position, I'd want other people to be able to go.
Click to expand...
FH - The analogy with a person who is blind not being able to drive is in my opinion not a valid one, because the blind person can still travel from A to B in a taxi. Possibly the football ban is more like saying the blind person can't travel from A to B at all.
 
Surely if we can show a covid vaccination certificate on our phones via NHS app then people with medical excemptions could be given a similar certificate to show on phone via NHS app. Thats not too difficult for this government is it? :LOL:
 
I am not against everyone being tested within 24 hours before they entry, but its the mechanics that bother me. Long lines of people closely packed, getting restless at 2.45pm-3pm showing evidence of a negative result. We really would have to check anyone aged 12 or above, like the schools do. The club would need tents as well where you could get a test and pick up kits etc.
 
Redwurzel said:
FH - The analogy with a person who is blind not being able to drive is in my opinion not a valid one, because the blind person can still travel from A to B in a taxi. Possibly the football ban is more like saying the blind person can't travel from A to B at all.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that driving is about more than transport. It's an issue of independence, identity and, for some, masculinity. Some people even enjoy it. The unvaccinated can still "watch football", but you and I know watching it on TV is not the same as watching it in the ground, if you want to stretch the analogy that far.

However, I introduced it, not as an analogy, but as an argument that our society imposes some restrictions on the freedoms of individuals on the basis of health, and that they are accepted. My question is, what's the difference? Is it simply that this one is new, or, as seems to be the fair argument, there are viable alternatives to a blanket ban? I can accept the latter argument, but any mechanism put in place would need to be sufficiently stringent to represent genuine protection, or what is the point?
 
fmttmadmin said:
If it helps people feel safer and more secure watching football then is it not a good thing?
I visit my dad in a care home and have to take a lateral flow test first - I would be happy to do that before watching football - would you?
Click to expand...
Thats a better, safer and more inclusive approach Rob
 
Wow. Looks like either I’m a million miles away from virtually everyone on this. Or this board is heavily biased.

This proposal is dreadfully devisive and deliberately so. But then this £h1t show of a government never surprise me.
 
Aet290204 said:
Wow. Looks like either I’m a million miles away from virtually everyone on this. Or this board is heavily biased.

This proposal is dreadfully devisive and deliberately so. But then this £h1t show of a government never surprise me.
Click to expand...
It is all those things aet and a passport does little to ensure safety. It is targeted at labour voters via football and uni students and ignores gatherings in theatre, cinema, banquets, auctions cricket party conferences the house of commons and I could go on.

Take heart in the fact that the tories won't allow this to get as far as parliamentary vote.
 
Aet290204 said:
Wow. Looks like either I’m a million miles away from virtually everyone on this. Or this board is heavily biased.

This proposal is dreadfully devisive and deliberately so. But then this £h1t show of a government never surprise me.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s that divisive to be honest. It seem to me to be a way to encourage people to get the vaccine. Not the done thing perhaps and manipulative but at least the end goal is a virtuous one. To encourage take up of the vaccine and protect people in large crowds
 
The worrying thing is someone could be double jabbed, have covid and attend a football match untested.
Testing has to be part of the way forward?
 
I would think that if we still need restrictions in October it would make sense to close all outlets in the concourse, insist on mask wearing whilst in the concourse and whilst queuing. Once in your seat I think the risk of infection is far lower in the open air(hopefully the test events support this supposition).

I've just got my "Certificate" on the NHS app and it appears as a QR code, presumably these could be read using a handscanner and would be difficult to fake (assuming they are personalised?) but quick to authenticate.

Just talking to a guy at work he rang up one of his suppliers (a one man band) he sounded awful (yup had got it) had he been vaccinated? No he "didn't bother". I think there are a few noisy anti vaxxxers but most unvaxxed people are just being lazy and perhaps something like this or even just it being mooted will push people into action.
 
Muttley said:
I would think that if we still need restrictions in October it would make sense to close all outlets in the concourse, insist on mask wearing whilst in the concourse and whilst queuing. Once in your seat I think the risk of infection is far lower in the open air(hopefully the test events support this supposition).

I've just got my "Certificate" on the NHS app and it appears as a QR code, presumably these could be read using a handscanner and would be difficult to fake (assuming they are personalised?) but quick to authenticate.

Just talking to a guy at work he rang up one of his suppliers (a one man band) he sounded awful (yup had got it) had he been vaccinated? No he "didn't bother". I think there are a few noisy anti vaxxxers but most unvaxxed people are just being lazy and perhaps something like this or even just it being mooted will push people into action.
Click to expand...
I think you are right mutley it's an attempt to get more people vaccinated. Johnson can't get his party to agree to this, not a hope in hell.
 
Laughing said:
It is all those things aet and a passport does little to ensure safety. It is targeted at labour voters via football and uni students and ignores gatherings in theatre, cinema, banquets, auctions cricket party conferences the house of commons and I could go on.

Take heart in the fact that the tories won't allow this to get as far as parliamentary vote.
Click to expand...
I’m equally shocked at reading some of the posts on here in support, or on the other hand maybe I’m not actually…..
 
Muttley said:
I would think that if we still need restrictions in October it would make sense to close all outlets in the concourse, insist on mask wearing whilst in the concourse and whilst queuing. Once in your seat I think the risk of infection is far lower in the open air(hopefully the test events support this supposition).

I've just got my "Certificate" on the NHS app and it appears as a QR code, presumably these could be read using a handscanner and would be difficult to fake (assuming they are personalised?) but quick to authenticate.

Just talking to a guy at work he rang up one of his suppliers (a one man band) he sounded awful (yup had got it) had he been vaccinated? No he "didn't bother". I think there are a few noisy anti vaxxxers but most unvaxxed people are just being lazy and perhaps something like this or even just it being mooted will push people into action.
Click to expand...
If pubs are allowed to open without restrictions or masks then why would the concourse not be allowed to have its outlets open?
 
Aet290204 said:
I’m equally shocked at reading some of the posts on here in support, or on the other hand maybe I’m not actually…..
Click to expand...
I think those in support are largely just looking for a way out. Some of the more vocal wouldn't care how devisive it is, but they are in the minority.

There is not a lot of critical thinking around this, it seems like it will reduce infections makes it seem like a good idea.

My thinking around this is that limiting games, or indeed any events, to only vaccinated people won't slow infections down. Most infections are amongst the vaccinated. By autumn we may well be in a race to boost the early vaccinated and the most vulnerable.

It's a silly idea in isolation and won't do any good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top