As the UK deals with the second wave of Covid-19 and the new strain, it is becoming increasingly apparent that professional football is not exempt from the havoc it is causing on all other sectors of life.
Tottenham Hotspur v Fulham was postponed on Wednesday after positive tests in the Fulham squad and, on Monday, Everton v Manchester City was also postponed following Covid cases at City.
Football clubs have been doing their best to keep the game going – testing players weekly, using bubbles and strict zoning inside stadiums and training grounds while adapting facilities to minimise close contact – but it is becoming increasingly clear that it isn’t enough. To stop the spread of Covid, and bearing in mind that football players are humans too, there needs to be a ‘circuit-break’ to the season.
Throughout the pandemic, it has seemed that footballers have often been overlooked in discussions deciding if the season could continue. One of the main motivations for ‘project restart’ was to stop the losses incurred by a lack of games – the weeks without matches resulted in a £170m rebate payable from clubs to Sky for domestic TV rights. This has now been deferred to the 2021-22 season, and more is owed to other broadcasters for international TV rights. The focus has been on keeping games going for the sake of completing matches rather than prioritising player welfare.
This has come from fans too. When it was announced that Everton and City had been postponed, the conversation on social media quickly became a numbers game, with people questioning why the match was not allowed to play if City had over 14 players at their disposal.
The dehumanised nature in which some have regarded players may stem from the fact that largely, those who are fit and healthy do not have severe coronavirus symptoms. The general consensus is that the 10 days for which a player is out when they catch the virus is nothing dissimilar to a normal injury. However, as the cases at Newcastle United have shown, this isn’t always the case.
Speaking earlier in December, Newcastle manager Steve Bruce confirmed that two of his players have been hit badly by the virus: “We’ve had vomiting, sores, mouth ulcers, no smell, no taste, but the big thing, and which is the worrying thing, is the welfare of one or two of them,” he said.
“That long-term Covid is something which you wouldn’t think possible in young, fit, athletes. Unfortunately, it is so. They go for a walk for half an hour and then they want to go back to bed. It’s as brutal as that.”
On 21 December, Ipswich Town physiotherapist Matt Byard was one of the first to suggest a temporary pause to English football, saying: “Football may benefit from a ‘circuit breaker’ before a return to playing securely.” A short two-week break would allow time for players to minimise the number of people who they come into contact with and hopefully reduce the levels of the virus around the game, making it a safer place to return to after the temporary pause.
With the Government quick to impose restrictions on other industries to help reduce the spread of the virus and protect those who are vulnerable, why have the footballing authorities not chosen to do the same to protect all involved in the game?
The Premier League has said that it has no plans to pause the season, explaining in a statement that it has “confidence in its Covid-19 protocols to enable fixtures to be played as scheduled, and these protocols continue to have the full backing of Government.
“With the health of players and staff the priority, the League is also fully supportive of how clubs are implementing the protocols and rules.”
The attitude that footballers and club staff must keep soldiering on throughout the pandemic is one that could potentially be damaging to those who work in it.
Clubs are already stretched to their limits with a cramped fixture schedule; postponements due to Covid-19 will only add to the difficulties which players and managers are facing. Many of those in the sport have echoed the need for action to be taken.
“I am 66 years old and the last thing I want to do is catch Covid,” West Brom’s manager Sam Allardyce said after their 5-0 defeat to Leeds United on Tuesday evening.
“As much as we’re getting tested – we had one positive this week – it seems to be creeping around. No matter how hard we try, no matter how many times we get tested, how we wear our masks, how we sanitise our hands, we’re still catching a lot of infections around the country.
“If that helps [circuit breaker], let’s do it and let the season run a little longer when we get through it.”
In the Women’s Super League and FA Women’s Championship, there were 32 positive tests in the latest round of testing between 14 December and 20 December. However, women’s football’s advantage is that the already existing winter break now comes at the perfect time to act as a natural ‘circuit-breaker’ and help to stop the spread of the virus.
For the health of English football, it may be time for those in control of the men’s game to concede and temporarily impose a break to make sure that the welfare of all of those involved in football is treated with the utmost importance.
Adam Millington is a freelance sports writer, mainly covering men’s and women’s football
from Football – inews.co.uk https://ift.tt/3ogxBG5
Post a Comment