Jump to content

Club covid executives - a statement.


antrin

Recommended Posts



Having read the article it really would be a waste of time appealing it, club knew about the car sharing, etc and postponed games because they couldn't get a squad together. Seems a pointless exercise.
In the case of dundee utd, theirs is staggeringly stupid given circumstances  but they are fulfilling fixtures as they must have a larger squad.
 
We got caught out through stupidity and smaller squad.


My reading of it, the club found out about the car sharing in the internal investigation subsequently to the postponements.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


20 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 


My reading of it, the club found out about the car sharing in the internal investigation subsequently to the postponements.

 

Whatever way its read, it's not good I'm sure you will agree. It's just imo that any appeal to this would be a waste of time and costly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cumbriansaint72 said:

Whatever way its read, it's not good I'm sure you will agree. It's just imo that any appeal to this would be a waste of time and costly. 

Disagree. I think the whole thing is a mass of contradictions, hypocrisy and confusion. There are absolutely grounds to contest this. Ourselves and Killie have been treated very harshly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

On what grounds? 

I'm with you on this FS. 

Yes it may seem harsh to some as it's our club involved, would we be having a big debate if it was another ............naw.

As much as it's a football club and it means a lot, it is a business as well.

Any business that was going to start up after lockdown had/has to operate with a strict covid protocol which all staff have to comply with it's that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yflab said:

It’s not as though they did not have enough warnings or time to implement the required processes. The players, staff and club have fcuked up big time with this case. Absolutely no excuse not to have carried out the required processes. 
 

However I don’t think they are alone in making mistakes. I reckon other clubs have had similar situations, but they did not result in any positive cases resulting in not being able to field a team and fulfil a fixture. 
 

I said at the time, we should have taken measures to field a team using youth players if need be. It was always going to end up like this. 
 

I don’t believe there is any value in appealing this judgement. Suck it up and focus on the remaining games.

I think you are right to the fact teams especially those with smaller squad might decide to give more youth players a chance.................ahem to avoid bad press.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cumbriansaint72 said:

Having read the article it really would be a waste of time appealing it, club knew about the car sharing, etc and postponed games because they couldn't get a squad together. Seems a pointless exercise.

In the case of dundee utd, theirs is staggeringly stupid given circumstances  but they are fulfilling fixtures as they must have a larger squad.

 

We got caught out through stupidity and smaller squad.

So the moral of the story is, make sure one has a big squad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Yflab said:

We should have taken youth players to Aberdeen for the away league tie we lost at the death. Was this us just taking the cheapest option so that we did not have to test additional players? That was the game where we had a chance to run down the clock with substitutions but Goodwin decided against it.

Personally I would rather we had taken a chance with youths against Motherwell and Hamilton than just forfeit the games 3-0. 

Re testing 

The SPFL advice changed from testing Monday and Thursday due to costs.

Don’t  know exactly when but certainly before shit hit the fan, we only tested on Monday as advised

We probably initially tested a squad size we could afford and added players only If totally necessary 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

On what grounds? 

On the grounds of fairness. Blatant breaches are occurring and being ignored elsewhere, yet ourselves and Killie are made examples of. Newcastles game was called off this weekend, dont even think theres an investigation, presumably the game will just be played at a later date? But not in Scotland, there has to be someone to blame, so lets look for a nice scapegoat.

I suppose its just a shame we arent as squeaky clean as Lawwells Celtic, with their own testing machine which no-one outwith the club sees the results from, and have achieved 0 positive tests. In fact, their players only test positive when on international duty, as quite a number have done....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yflab said:

Both ourselves and Kilmarnock failed to have sufficient players to take part in matches. No other clubs in the top league have failed to do so unless I’ve missed something. Celtic and Aberdeen games were called off by Scottish government. 

So why do other leagues not adopt the same approach? I presume Newcastle will lose their game v Villa 3-0?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Yflab said:

Both ourselves and Kilmarnock failed to have sufficient players to take part in matches. No other clubs in the top league have failed to do so unless I’ve missed something. Celtic and Aberdeen games were called off by Scottish government. 

No they weren't the decision was left to the spfl. Who decided to call the games off probably to appease the goverment who wanted something done but left the decision to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hendo said:

On the grounds of fairness. Blatant breaches are occurring and being ignored elsewhere, yet ourselves and Killie are made examples of. Newcastles game was called off this weekend, dont even think theres an investigation, presumably the game will just be played at a later date? But not in Scotland, there has to be someone to blame, so lets look for a nice scapegoat.

I suppose its just a shame we arent as squeaky clean as Lawwells Celtic, with their own testing machine which no-one outwith the club sees the results from, and have achieved 0 positive tests. In fact, their players only test positive when on international duty, as quite a number have done....

Aye, that'll stand up in court. 

All this "scapegoat" stuff makes me laugh and smacks of deflection, as does bringing in other clubs who have not fcuked up as we, unfortunately, have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Yflab said:

Have Newcastle breached any protocols as laid down by their governing authorities?

Classic whataboutery.

Nobody knows, because theyre not even being investigated. The English authorities just view it as something that might happen, while Scottish authorities have to have someone to blame, as long as its a wee club without much power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the car sharing point. If the club had told players they must not do this, but the players did it anyway (lets say getting to/from training) isn't that similar to the Aberdeen players going on a bender or Boli buggering off to Spain?  I have no issue with us being punished for breaches, but there needs to be some consistency in the level of punishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, saint in exile said:

 I have no issue with us being punished for breaches, but there needs to be some consistency in the level of punishment.

It's a tier 3 punishment.  Points loss, goals loss and money loss (on possible several aspects).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the SPFL case against us evolves around our trip to QoS. At no point does the report make you aware that QoS had a Covid outbreak in the management which came to light a day after we played them. Could this have been the point of transmission. Worth noting that Premier teams are tested twice a week. Where as the lower league teams are never tested. Our Covid incidents only occurred when we had to play these teams in the League Cup.

The Joint Response Group issued an email to the clubs on 13 August 2020 following the Aberdeen amend Celtic incidents that advised that they would be reviewing club Covid polices, they (SPFL) would continually educate players, they encouraged engagement.  From the SPFL report on SMFC it would appear that they have been remiss in their duties to the club. The document also makes no reference to punishment or penalties.

In fact the SPFL issued review on 2 November of trying to enforce a 3-0 defeat on clubs if they could not fulfil their fixtures. This was rejected by the Clubs. The same review admits that the SPFL do not have any protocols in place and are encouraging them to be put in place.

It appears that SPFL have decided to enforce their own archaic punishment on SMFC and Kilmarnock without the support of its members. Question is why.

Also worth noting that the SPFL Board is made up of Celtic, Hamilton and St Johnstone. Who set the penalty and who approved it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make very excellent points filter in that Queens train full time in the central belt I would doubt that their players would not car share on their trips to Dumfries for home games.For certain QOTS would not be in a position to hire two buses. Something that the league said we we should do.Quite frankly to me the whole episode is a mess.Far from making things worse for clubs the league should be doing all they can to help clubs.I refuse to believe that Celtic have had no positive cases at club level yet when their players go on international duty you find their players can test positive on an asymptomatic level.I am still livid that Aberdeen and Celtic were not hit with 3-0 losses yet the league deemed it ok to hit us and Killie.Finally I fail to see how punishment levels can be changed during the season without the express authority of the majority of clubs.

Most of the SPFL case against us evolves around our trip to QoS. At no point does the report make you aware that QoS had a Covid outbreak in the management which came to light a day after we played them. Could this have been the point of transmission. Worth noting that Premier teams are tested twice a week. Where as the lower league teams are never tested. Our Covid incidents only occurred when we had to play these teams in the League Cup.
The Joint Response Group issued an email to the clubs on 13 August 2020 following the Aberdeen amend Celtic incidents that advised that they would be reviewing club Covid polices, they (SPFL) would continually educate players, they encouraged engagement.  From the SPFL report on SMFC it would appear that they have been remiss in their duties to the club. The document also makes no reference to punishment or penalties.
In fact the SPFL issued review on 2 November of trying to enforce a 3-0 defeat on clubs if they could not fulfil their fixtures. This was rejected by the Clubs. The same review admits that the SPFL do not have any protocols in place and are encouraging them to be put in place.
It appears that SPFL have decided to enforce their own archaic punishment on SMFC and Kilmarnock without the support of its members. Question is why.
Also worth noting that the SPFL Board is made up of Celtic, Hamilton and St Johnstone. Who set the penalty and who approved it. 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Yflab said:


What about the car sharing Gordon?

How many players were guilty of this?

What about the breaches of protocol on the bus and the pre match meal?

These breaches happened despite so much advice that most school kids understand.
 

I never saw any reference to the players car sharing with Gordon. Or how many players tried to get into Gordons car

Breaches of what protocols. I have not seen these special protocols have you. If so enlighten me.

As for your final point the problem is that the advice is so woolly there is no clarity on what is right. So are you stating  that it is a MUST to follow all of these ever changing rules when off the pitch but when your on the pitch swapping sweat, heading a ball, spitting on the pitch,hugging other players that you can’t catch Covid.

We are being hung out to dry because our players had the audacity to get sick. Had the entire team came down with measles would we have been treated the same way.

We get punished for players sitting too close at a meal. However if prior to the game 9 of them went to the bank house for a pint we would have been okay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

Most of the SPFL case against us evolves around our trip to QoS. At no point does the report make you aware that QoS had a Covid outbreak in the management which came to light a day after we played them. Could this have been the point of transmission. Worth noting that Premier teams are tested twice a week. Where as the lower league teams are never tested. Our Covid incidents only occurred when we had to play these teams in the League Cup.

The Joint Response Group issued an email to the clubs on 13 August 2020 following the Aberdeen amend Celtic incidents that advised that they would be reviewing club Covid polices, they (SPFL) would continually educate players, they encouraged engagement.  From the SPFL report on SMFC it would appear that they have been remiss in their duties to the club. The document also makes no reference to punishment or penalties.

In fact the SPFL issued review on 2 November of trying to enforce a 3-0 defeat on clubs if they could not fulfil their fixtures. This was rejected by the Clubs. The same review admits that the SPFL do not have any protocols in place and are encouraging them to be put in place.

It appears that SPFL have decided to enforce their own archaic punishment on SMFC and Kilmarnock without the support of its members. Question is why.

Also worth noting that the SPFL Board is made up of Celtic, Hamilton and St Johnstone. Who set the penalty and who approved it. 

 

Your pointing out that premier teams are tested twice a week is challenged by an interview in the Black and White magazine 

JG says on SPFL advice it now only happens once a week and on the Monday. He highlighted the flaw of testing process in results,on a Saturday, who knows if players are positive or negative 

Cost of testing given as reason for change 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your pointing out that premier teams are tested twice a week is challenged by an interview in the Black and White magazine 
JG says on SPFL advice it now only happens once a week and on the Monday. He highlighted the flaw of testing process in results,on a Saturday, who knows if players are positive or negative 
Cost of testing given as reason for change 
The testing started at twice weekly, went to once a week then reverted back to twice weekly from memory in july after the initial 7 positive tests. Not sure when it returned to once a week. But shows that changes are happening all the time, and at times hard to remember what the restrictions are at, at any particular moment. Think my own works safe systems at work is now at the 30th revision. [emoji3061]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

The testing started at twice weekly, went to once a week then reverted back to twice weekly from memory in july after the initial 7 positive tests. Not sure when it returned to once a week. But shows that changes are happening all the time, and at times hard to remember what the restrictions are at, at any particular moment. Think my own works safe systems at work is now at the 30th revision. emoji3061.png

Don’t know when interview was done but certainly after latest issues became public 

It starts off highlighting the flaws in the system but also how hard to form a bubble that can’t be 24/7 and hope it works

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yflab said:

They would have probably been suspended for at least 3 games just like Aberdeen.

So no enforced forfeit of games and goals and financial penalty then. Just a 3 game ban.

Maybe the SPFL should have served a 3 game ban on the players that were ill. If they got ill then in theory they were to blame. 

Link to comment
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...
×
×
  • Create New...