Jump to content

is Dulwich Hamlet game on?


macutd

Recommended Posts

It is completely irresponsible of the Club to be promoting the match in the current situation. I hope fans who say they don?t care whether they infect themselves by attending will stop to consider whether they would really want to pass the virus on to others in the community who may be more vulnerable than themselves, in local shops, pubs and stations. The most community-minded thing the club could do would be to cancel the match.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sdrs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It is completely irresponsible of the Club to be

> promoting the match in the current situation. I

> hope fans who say they don?t care whether they

> infect themselves by attending will stop to

> consider whether they would really want to pass

> the virus on to others in the community who may be

> more vulnerable than themselves, in local shops,

> pubs and stations. The most community-minded thing

> the club could do would be to cancel the match.



I completely agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sdrs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It is completely irresponsible of the Club to be

> promoting the match in the current situation. I

> hope fans who say they don?t care whether they

> infect themselves by attending will stop to

> consider whether they would really want to pass

> the virus on to others in the community who may be

> more vulnerable than themselves, in local shops,

> pubs and stations. The most community-minded thing

> the club could do would be to cancel the match.




Agreed. DHFC has always prided itself on being a community-minded club. It should put the community (which includes many vulnerable people as well as those who work at or are visiting friends & relatives in Kings College Hospital down the road) first in this situation. I'm sure many would appreciate the club taking a cautious approach. Especially as govt is now indicating a clampdown on mass gatherings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Penguin68 Wrote:

------------------------------------------------------

>

> Surely if you are worried you can choose not to

> go?



It's not just a matter of choosing not to go if you are worried.


It's a matter of those who are not worried and who do choose to go potentially spreading the virus to vulnerable others, either at the match or travelling to and from it.


You can be infectious without knowing it, before symptoms develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> It should put the community (which

> includes many vulnerable people

> as well as those who work at or

> are visiting friends & relatives

> in Kings College Hospital down

> the road) first in this situation.


I hope and trust that those groups will by now already be very wary of unduly increasing their risk of exposure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government's argument is that there are many (young, healthy) individuals for whom Covid-19 is not a threat, they will suffer only mild symptoms and recover. The more gain this immunity (what evidence there is suggests that people do not catch it twice) the greater the 'herd immunity' will be in the population. So long as they self-isolate if sick their chances of infecting the more vulnerable (elderly, with underlying health issues) is reduced -as it is when these vulnerable individuals (a group to whom I belong) take greater care with their health and exposure).


The idea at least makes some sense. The alternative view is that locking everyone away for several weeks will allow the infection to burn out in isolated homes - so when we are released there won't be people around to infect us. It's a new disease so no one actually knows which view is right. And it assumes that the disease burn-out will take place everywhere, otherwise visitors coming in will re-introduce the virus, into populations not protected by any herd immunity.


Difficult one to call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not difficult at all Penguin. Herd immunity only works as part of a vaccination programme, the idea being that those most at risk are protected behind a wall of a vaccinated majority. The term herd immunity was completely misused in that press conference. You do not achieve herd immunity by experimenting with a new virus for which there is no vaccine.


On football games, given that the FA has cancelled all games til the end of march in the higher leagues, it surely should have sent a message to all other clubs to cancel theirs too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand the games the FA cancelled in the higher leagues were because a few of the players and a manager tested positive for the virus and therefore all the affected teams were put in isolation.


Also they wanted to keep the emergency services which usually attend big matches i.e. police and medical to be freed up to help with the coronavirus situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> On football games, given that the FA has cancelled

> all games til the end of march in the higher

> leagues, it surely should have sent a message to

> all other clubs to cancel theirs too.


The FA is recommending that non-professional football can continue as usual, fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • @Rockets : No one has changed the definition of 'consultation' or 'referendum', or switched the terms. They are different things and have different meanings. You can even check this in a dictionary if you're not sure about it. Regarding the most recent consultation (at least the one I assume you're referring to), it was about the design of the Square. It was not a consultation on the existence of the LTN itself, despite (again rather desperately and a little embarrassingly) some people pretending it was.  As for One Dulwich, I think what vexes people has been very clearly articulated, and very conspicuously ducked by those posting their regular missives: Firstly, they're claiming that people are accidentally driving through the square because of bad signage / lack of clarity. This is both ridiculous and ironic. Ridiculous because no sensible person could possibly believe it to be true, and ironic because they've objected to any updates to the layout (instead trying to pretend it's a rerun of the LTN consultation itself which closed several years ago as noted above). Secondly, they've claimed that someone has been pressurising the emergency services, yet fail to say who, or how. You seem to have suggested it may be the involvement of the 'far left' 😄 Anyway, It's all very tedious. If you want to improve signage, engage in that conversation, instead of trying to reopen debates that have finished. If you're going to claim intimidation of the emergency services, you probably want to give details and have some evidence. And if you think someone can drive through the square by mistake, you may want to question what you consider to be safe and competent driving. 🤣    
    • Got mine two days ago plus yesterday I received a second-class letter which was posted the day before in Sydenham
    • Back, regrettably, to the Private Eye benchmark test.  Have folk expecting the issue that would normally have been delivered on Wednesday the 24th received theirs yet, and if so, when?
    • What area are you in?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...