In the UK our friendly football is only starting today and the continuation of that, I feel, is underthreat given the UK government's narrative yesterday.Low division grassroots open age. I had a player come on with a mask on. Looked like a snood going all around his neck but it was a mask and worn as a mask. I let him play with it. Has anyone else had this?
In the UK our friendly football is only starting today and the continuation of that, I feel, is underthreat given the UK government's narrative yesterday.
If it looked like and appeared to be a snood, I wouldn't have allowed it.
Our resumption guidance is very much football is the same so I think for me that means the laws around equipment are.
I would perhaps stretch to allowing a traditional face covering/mask, the cloth kind that hook behind the ears provided their was no obvious impact to safety.
Can't imagine playing covering the face is particularly comfortable in Australia, even in Winter
Yes it was a pleasant sunny 18 degrees Celsius (contrary to last week when I did two games under pouring rain). I can't imagine him wearing it to keep warm. Although it looked like a snood it had outward indentation out the front for chin and nose with specific stitching around it. He wore it on the bench as well. Anyway I allowed it with current climate considerations.In the UK our friendly football is only starting today and the continuation of that, I feel, is underthreat given the UK government's narrative yesterday.
If it looked like and appeared to be a snood, I wouldn't have allowed it.
Our resumption guidance is very much football is the same so I think for me that means the laws around equipment are.
I would perhaps stretch to allowing a traditional face covering/mask, the cloth kind that hook behind the ears provided their was no obvious impact to safety.
Can't imagine playing covering the face is particularly comfortable in Australia, even in Winter
If players are that concerned about it that they want to wear a mask on the field, then perhaps they should stay at home.
I didn't read ARF's post as mocking - just pointing out the inconsistency in approach.
Same logic as if you're worried about catching covid in the pub then erm....don't go to the pub!
Seriously?! With hundreds of thousands of people dying you’re mocking someone for being overly cautious?
Its not as simple as that. I am worried about catching covid from other people, the answer is not to stay at home for a whole year. Its a matter of still living your life and taking appropriate precautions. I went to the pub with 3 work colleagues last Friday after work. We all registered our contact details at the entrance. Sat 1.5 meters apart. Enjoyed a drink before heading home.
Very true. But why have the 4th officials in the EPL and now SPFL had to wear one when everyone around them doesn’t have one? Everyone’s apparently been tested so no one there has it. For me it reinforces that masks are ultimately for show, without bringing many benefits.new normal for football is that players and officials not expected, nor is it really practical, given restrictions to airflow, for players/officials to wear masks during play
Wearing a mask protects others from you. Not the other way around.
Consider also that the vast majority of people who contract the virus recover fine and that the average age for fatalities is 80.
Wearing a face mask to play football is ultimately pointless.
Very true. But why have the 4th officials in the EPL and now SPFL had to wear one when everyone around them doesn’t have one? Everyone’s apparently been tested so no one there has it. For me it reinforces that masks are ultimately for show, without bringing many benefits.
Umm, no. While the primary value of the mask is protecting others, the more recent guidance is that the maks also protects the wearer to a lesser degree. (How much depends on the particular mask and context.) And "recover fine" is a bit of mis-statement as well.
You can get bogged down in the "what ifs" and the endless drivel and minutiae of it if you like mate, that's your right. The bare scientific facts are that it's transmitted in its airborne form via minute droplets. No face mask will protect you from breathing it in, else you'd suffocate. A mask will absorb (to a degree) any droplets you yourself expel whilst breathing sedately but for a limited time only. Certainly not whilst you're huffing, puffing and blowing during heavy or even moderate cardiovascular activity. In short, simple logic dictates that wearing a facemask/covering playing football will be about as effective as a cat flap in an elephant house!!
True, there are some recovered cases who have represented with organ damage thought to be directly attributed to having fought the virus, but again, those are a tiny percentage.
So, umm yes.
I'll let the science and logic work for me ...
Of course they do, they always have. Anything covering your nose and mouth will prevent the infected droplets reaching your breathing zone......just not very effectively.Growing Body Of Evidence Suggests Masks Protect Those Wearing Them, Too
NPR's Ailsa Chang talks with Dr. Monica Gandhi of the University of California, San Francisco, about growing evidence that masks help lower the severity of the coronavirus for those who wear them.www.npr.org
Studies and counter-studies... no real consensusGrowing Body Of Evidence Suggests Masks Protect Those Wearing Them, Too
NPR's Ailsa Chang talks with Dr. Monica Gandhi of the University of California, San Francisco, about growing evidence that masks help lower the severity of the coronavirus for those who wear them.www.npr.org