Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We have just been for a daily walk. Saw a full on game or perhaps training session in Peckham Rye Park. Contact tackling etc, at least 20 players in training bibs, others watching.I am sure this is against all Covid19 advice and guidance. Presumably whoever organised this doesn't care.No sign of police. Have the authorities given up on social distancing? I don't want to be a killjoy but this felt irresponsible.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/252604-football-in-the-park/
Share on other sites

What bothers me about the government strategy, is easing lockdown before they have an intensive test, track and trace system in place. By the time we get to that, the virus could already be on its way to another peak. We also need to understand why BAME people are disproportionately impacted. It is very easy for the public to have a false sense of security while that curve is flattened but if that R number rises above 1 again, we'll be back in lockdown. On enforcement, we just do not have enough police officers and wardens etc to do that effectively.

Anyone who went out for their daily exercise to Alleyns' Field or Dulwich Park at any time since the so-called (because many people have NOT adhered to it) lockdown would have seen several football sessions going on. In fact several weeks ago on Alleyns' field a man was trying to encourage people to join him and his mate in a game...a couple did before I'd left.

Also, on Sunday, late afternoon, in Dulwich Park, there was a large crowd near the Court Lane gates sitting on the grass, not social distancing.

The government have no control over these people who endanger their own lives and those of others and thereby threaten the resilience of the NHS- short of employing military tactics -so they had no choice but to ease the lockdown- it had already eased itself to a large extent.

Also given the amount of spitting attacks on front line staff, there are people who are out to deliberately infect others.

I'e just come back from Peckham Rye park and was surprised how many parents/carers of children are meeting up with others - I saw several groups of multiple adults/children with no social distancing going on whatsoever. Children all freely mixing and playing together.

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> Definitely not allowed! Please Mountain walker,

> could you email me any details you can, where,

> what time, age of players etc so that we can try

> and identify whether it is one of the clubs that

> usually use the park to play. my details are below

> thanks Renata


Renata, you say it is definitely not allowed. But to my knowledge you are wrong on this. There is no law to say how many people can gather and no law to say you have to keep 2 metres apart.


These are all recommendations for our own good and while infringements to Liberty we hope people will willingly accept them given the pandemic.


I mention this because people complaining about this that and the other seem confused on the various threads. Lord Sumption has been explaining this well on the news programmes and it is why most of the police arrests we?ve been hearing about cannot be prosecuted as no law or laws have been broken.

I've noticed large groups of men drinking and socialising outside a Nigerian sounding restaurant by Lidl in Peckham, opposite Burger King. This has been going on for weeks every time the sun is out. When they hear a Police car approach they all cunningly move 2 meters away from each other.


Then people wonder why the Queens Road Peckham area has the most deaths in the borough- 15 as of 2 weeks ago, now probably higher.

edcam Wrote:

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

> Idiots. This government has a lot to answer for

> with their wishy-washy "advice". Plus - so many

> people are stupid.


The advice is quite clear- there is a hard core of people who ignore it. I've just seen 10 teenagers playing footie in Alleyn's Field 8 BAME and 2 white kids...no social distancing and close tackling.

Also a woman with 2 kids turned up there and the kids - 7 and 5 ish run straight up to some other children there- so all the nonsense about not sending kids to school is a joke...anyway plenty of kids are at school as their parents are key workers who would be the most likely to pass infection on...

keano77 Wrote:

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

> Renata Hamvas Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Definitely not allowed! Please Mountain walker,

> > could you email me any details you can, where,

> > what time, age of players etc so that we can

> try

> > and identify whether it is one of the clubs

> that

> > usually use the park to play. my details are

> below

> > thanks Renata

>

> Renata, you say it is definitely not allowed. But

> to my knowledge you are wrong on this. There is no

> law to say how many people can gather and no law

> to say you have to keep 2 metres apart.

>

> These are all recommendations for our own good and

> while infringements to Liberty we hope people will

> willingly accept them given the pandemic.

>

> I mention this because people complaining about

> this that and the other seem confused on the

> various threads. Lord Sumption has been explaining

> this well on the news programmes and it is why

> most of the police arrests we?ve been hearing

> about cannot be prosecuted as no law or laws have

> been broken.


I know there's confusion especially as the police seem to have wrongly charged - but I guess that's a technicality.


"5. Public gatherings

To ensure people are social distancing, the government has prohibited by law all public gatherings of more than two people, except for reasons set out in the regulations. These include:"


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing and http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/2020-05-13


Mind these superseded the ones below on 1 may - so maybe police do now have law and didn't below (a total guess that when Pritti Patel relaxed the regulations she tightened up the loopholes LOL)


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-guidance-on-social-distancing-and-for-vulnerable-people/guidance-on-social-distancing-for-everyone-in-the-uk-and-protecting-older-people-and-vulnerable-adults


Edit: I note how this phrase was added to every paragraph later "Commencement Information I1 Reg. 1 in force at made date at 1.00 p.m., see reg. 1(1)" - only a lawyer could understand what that means ?

Do we need to know the BAME/white ratios when discussing teenagers playing football in the park?


seenbeen Wrote:

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

> edcam Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Idiots. This government has a lot to answer

> for

> > with their wishy-washy "advice". Plus - so

> many

> > people are stupid.

>

> The advice is quite clear- there is a hard core of

> people who ignore it. I've just seen 10 teenagers

> playing footie in Alleyn's Field 8 BAME and 2

> white kids...no social distancing and close

> tackling.

> Also a woman with 2 kids turned up there and the

> kids - 7 and 5 ish run straight up to some other

> children there- so all the nonsense about not

> sending kids to school is a joke...anyway plenty

> of kids are at school as their parents are key

> workers who would be the most likely to pass

> infection on...

Kiajag Wrote:

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

> Do we need to know the BAME/white ratios when

> discussing teenagers playing football in the

> park?

>

> seenbeen Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > edcam Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Idiots. This government has a lot to answer

> > for

> > > with their wishy-washy "advice". Plus - so

> > many

> > > people are stupid.

> >

> > The advice is quite clear- there is a hard core

> of

> > people who ignore it. I've just seen 10

> teenagers

> > playing footie in Alleyn's Field 8 BAME and 2

> > white kids...no social distancing and close

> > tackling.

> > Also a woman with 2 kids turned up there and

> the

> > kids - 7 and 5 ish run straight up to some

> other

> > children there- so all the nonsense about not

> > sending kids to school is a joke...anyway

> plenty

> > of kids are at school as their parents are key

> > workers who would be the most likely to pass

> > infection on...



Yes we do need to know the ratio of BAME to white. Southwark has one of the highest death rates of COVID19, and Peckham being the highest. It's useless having an expensive enquiry into why BAME have a higher rate of death unless we understand why. Please take a walk along Peckham high street/rye lane. I can't imagine you've done that. If not, before you comment, go and have a look at the facts.

lindylou Wrote:

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

>

> Yes we do need to know the ratio of BAME to white.

> Southwark has one of the highest death rates of

> COVID19, and Peckham being the highest. It's

> useless having an expensive enquiry into why BAME

> have a higher rate of death unless we understand

> why. Please take a walk along Peckham high

> street/rye lane. I can't imagine you've done that.

> If not, before you comment, go and have a look at

> the facts.


what facts are you talking about? what is it that you want people to see in Peckham?

pk - I think lindlylou is referencing the collective lack of self-distancing evident around Rye Lane/High St.

It's certainly the case, I shop there every few days and it's noticeable (if you're trying to take precautions for yourself).

To be fair though, I wouldn't say Lordship Lane is the shining example of how to distance either, people acting clueless there too !

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> pk - I think lindlylou is referencing the

> collective lack of self-distancing evident around

> Rye Lane/High St.

> It's certainly the case, I shop there every few

> days and it's noticeable (if you're trying to take

> precautions for yourself).

> To be fair though, I wouldn't say Lordship Lane is

> the shining example of how to distance either,

> people acting clueless there too !



so both ED and Peckham are bad


but the BAME people are the worst? is that the 'fact' that she's getting at?

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> pk - I think lindlylou is referencing the

> collective lack of self-distancing evident around

> Rye Lane/High St.

> It's certainly the case, I shop there every few

> days and it's noticeable (if you're trying to take

> precautions for yourself).

> To be fair though, I wouldn't say Lordship Lane is

> the shining example of how to distance either,

> people acting clueless there too !



Thank you KidKruger. My post was in no way racist but why do certain members of society think this disease won't affect then? And yes, I am concerned that the incidence is higher in the BAME society. That said, if I were a BAME, I sure as hell would be looking after myself and my family.

pk Wrote:

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

> KidKruger Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > pk - I think lindlylou is referencing the

> > collective lack of self-distancing evident

> around

> > Rye Lane/High St.

> > It's certainly the case, I shop there every few

> > days and it's noticeable (if you're trying to

> take

> > precautions for yourself).

> > To be fair though, I wouldn't say Lordship Lane

> is

> > the shining example of how to distance either,

> > people acting clueless there too !

>

>

> so both ED and Peckham are bad

>

> but the BAME people are the worst? is that the

> 'fact' that she's getting at?

lindylou Wrote:

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

> Kiajag Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Do we need to know the BAME/white ratios when

> > discussing teenagers playing football in the

> > park?

> >

> > seenbeen Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > edcam Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Idiots. This government has a lot to

> answer

> > > for

> > > > with their wishy-washy "advice". Plus - so

> > > many

> > > > people are stupid.

> > >

> > > The advice is quite clear- there is a hard

> core

> > of

> > > people who ignore it. I've just seen 10

> > teenagers

> > > playing footie in Alleyn's Field 8 BAME and 2

> > > white kids...no social distancing and close

> > > tackling.

> > > Also a woman with 2 kids turned up there and

> > the

> > > kids - 7 and 5 ish run straight up to some

> > other

> > > children there- so all the nonsense about not

> > > sending kids to school is a joke...anyway

> > plenty

> > > of kids are at school as their parents are

> key

> > > workers who would be the most likely to pass

> > > infection on...

>

>

> Yes we do need to know the ratio of BAME to white.

> Southwark has one of the highest death rates of

> COVID19, and Peckham being the highest. It's

> useless having an expensive enquiry into why BAME

> have a higher rate of death unless we understand

> why. Please take a walk along Peckham high

> street/rye lane. I can't imagine you've done that.

> If not, before you comment, go and have a look at

> the facts.




So by this logic whenever talking about groups of people congregating or breaking social distancing rules we should not only outline the number of people but also highlight the specific racial breakdown of said group? E.g. Bbq at xx location spotted, around twenty individuals, 75% BAME. Should we also try to ascertain whether the white proportion are from the likes of Italy, Spain or the the US too, or do I need to walk down Rome high-street as well?

Kiajag Wrote:

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

> lindylou Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Kiajag Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Do we need to know the BAME/white ratios when

> > > discussing teenagers playing football in the

> > > park?

> > >

> > > seenbeen Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > edcam Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > > > Idiots. This government has a lot to

> > answer

> > > > for

> > > > > with their wishy-washy "advice". Plus -

> so

> > > > many

> > > > > people are stupid.

> > > >

> > > > The advice is quite clear- there is a hard

> > core

> > > of

> > > > people who ignore it. I've just seen 10

> > > teenagers

> > > > playing footie in Alleyn's Field 8 BAME and

> 2

> > > > white kids...no social distancing and close

> > > > tackling.

> > > > Also a woman with 2 kids turned up there

> and

> > > the

> > > > kids - 7 and 5 ish run straight up to some

> > > other

> > > > children there- so all the nonsense about

> not

> > > > sending kids to school is a joke...anyway

> > > plenty

> > > > of kids are at school as their parents are

> > key

> > > > workers who would be the most likely to

> pass

> > > > infection on...

> >

> >

> > Yes we do need to know the ratio of BAME to

> white.

> > Southwark has one of the highest death rates of

> > COVID19, and Peckham being the highest. It's

> > useless having an expensive enquiry into why

> BAME

> > have a higher rate of death unless we

> understand

> > why. Please take a walk along Peckham high

> > street/rye lane. I can't imagine you've done

> that.

> > If not, before you comment, go and have a look

> at

> > the facts.

>

>

>

> So by this logic whenever talking about groups of

> people congregating or breaking social distancing

> rules we should not only outline the number of

> people but also highlight the specific racial

> breakdown of said group? E.g. Bbq at xx location

> spotted, around twenty individuals, 75% BAME.

> Should we also try to ascertain whether the white

> proportion are from the likes of Italy, Spain or

> the the US too, or do I need to walk down Rome

> high-street as well?



For goodness sake. Open your eyes. As I've said before. Take a walk, or a huffing puffing jog to Rye Lane/Peckham high street then, and only then, can you post an opinion. When we're you there? What time? What did you.notice. Answer: I havent been there. Why would I. I'm fine thanks. Why would I ever walk around there? Sums most of you up. Peckham is wonderful, but I wouldn't go there, God forbi. Edited to day the only reason I went there was to go to NatWest Bank. No social distancing in the queue. I stood in the road and asked someone to save my place. The social distancing was less than one metre.

lindylou - it's easy (and lazy) for people to call grave insults on people over the internet as I'm sure you know (seeing as you're experiencing it !).

I'm also concerned that some groups of the population are experiencing higher than average infection (not sure about deaths, but assume it's same proportion for all group ?). Reasons are surely attitude, awareness, social pressure and cultural.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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