Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Gordaleman
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 853 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:20 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:19 pm
The decision for Orient to forfeit the game was part of the competition rules. It would have been a disgrace if the agreed rules weren't enforced. The protection provided by FA/EFL is to enforce the rules - and help ensure that professional football can continue to be played during these covid times.
They are also supposed to help clubs in time of need, not just throw the book at them without a second thought.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:22 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:13 pm
So basically the message they are giving out: Don't test your players. If you do, you could be punished for doing such a thing.
As I've posted above, I'm guessing the clubs voted against the obligation to test the players. It would have been better and make more sense to reduce wages so that money was available to test the players - with the shortfall paid to the players once this is all over.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:26 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:20 pm
They are also supposed to help clubs in time of need, not just throw the book at them without a second thought.
I'm not sure what there was to think about. The rules were agreed before the comp started. All the clubs knew the rules.

It was Leyton chairman who was asking for "second thought" when the game had been called off. I can understand, especially when he realised his club had lost the chance for £150k tv money. It might have been better if he'd ensured everyone was covid-safe before hand.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by aggi » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:31 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:43 pm
I think it should have been a massive, £150,000 tv money incentive for Leyton to keep their players safe from covid-19 infection. The rules re a team not being able to field a team we agreed before the competition began. If Leyton didn't think they couldn't keep their players covid free, maybe they shouldn't have entered.

Yes, typical, weird rules. You must be covid-negative, but not compulsory to be tested before the games. I guess that was the EFL's compromise, when clubs said they couldn't afford the tests.

I'd have thought it a disgrace if the rules hadn't been complied with and Leyton had been allowed to play the game when everyone was better.
Being realistic though, Premier League clubs may be able to do this. They have a lot of money for testing, the players earn such amounts that the club can have a huge amount of influence over them, etc.

What are Leyton Orient going to do? They can't afford to keep testing the players and staff so any infection may impact a large number of the squad. They can't have their players and their families live like hermits, in many cases they'll have partners who are working, children at school, etc.

Look at West Ham, their manager tested positive. If that hadn't been found early it could have impacted the whole team.

It's just badly thought out.

Gordaleman
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 853 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:31 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:26 pm
I'm not sure what there was to think about. The rules were agreed before the comp started. All the clubs knew the rules.

It was Leyton chairman who was asking for "second thought" when the game had been called off. I can understand, especially when he realised his club had lost the chance for £150k tv money. It might have been better if he'd ensured everyone was covid-safe before hand.
The rules that you keep quoting were written long before the Covid situation arose and no one could have forseen the consequences of it.

Even Jurgen Klopp is saying today that little clubs should get more financial help from the bigger clubs. Had Orient had that sort of help, then maybe they would have done the testing earlier?

The way things are going, there might only be the EPL in existence soon. What a horrible thought that is when there is no relegation, because there's nowhere to relegate to.

Meanwhile thousands of people are put out of work because of short sighted officials and government.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by aggi » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:35 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:22 pm
As I've posted above, I'm guessing the clubs voted against the obligation to test the players. It would have been better and make more sense to reduce wages so that money was available to test the players - with the shortfall paid to the players once this is all over.
A league 2 player having 25% (£100 a test, twice a week, £40k avg salary) lopped off their wages for testing seems pretty harsh.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:46 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:35 pm
A league 2 player having 25% (£100 a test, twice a week, £40k avg salary) lopped off their wages for testing seems pretty harsh.
What level have the gov't capped the furlough scheme, was it equivalent of £30k p.a?

It may be a big chunk of wages, but it's not forever - and would be paid back when the club has the finances to do that.

How different would that be to the Macc players who went without being paid all their wages for some weeks?

Covid-19 is a serious situation. I'm all for football being played, but don't think we should place football players higher up the priorities that beating the virus.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:50 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:31 pm
The rules that you keep quoting were written long before the Covid situation arose and no one could have forseen the consequences of it.

Even Jurgen Klopp is saying today that little clubs should get more financial help from the bigger clubs. Had Orient had that sort of help, then maybe they would have done the testing earlier?

The way things are going, there might only be the EPL in existence soon. What a horrible thought that is when there is no relegation, because there's nowhere to relegate to.

Meanwhile thousands of people are put out of work because of short sighted officials and government.
Hi Gordaleman, I'm not sure when the rules were first put in place. I do know that they were reported before the start of this season's Carabao Cup. I'd expect they were voted on by the EFL - along with the scheduling of Rounds 1 thru 4, no replays, 90 mins then pens etc.

How would it have helped if Leyton hadn't been tested and the game was played - and the covid-19 infection had got to lots more people before the outbreak was discovered? That's the bigger threat to the pyramid, isn't it?

Gordaleman
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 853 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:59 pm

That's not my point at all Paul. My point is the incredible lack of help from the EFL, FA and EPL for the smaller clubs throughout this Covid situation. If smaller clubs had got some assistence in the first place, this situation probably wouldn't have arisen.

As it is, the EFL are just proving that they can't think outside the box. (And their rules.) This game could easily have been rescheduled as the following round isn't until December and as both teams would likely play reserve teams anyway, it wouldn't really impact on other games.

Lower league teams are in dire straits as it is without the EFL depriving them of much needed TV money.

bfcmik
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
Been Liked: 891 times
Has Liked: 1100 times
Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by bfcmik » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:08 pm

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:10 pm
They should scrap all sport until they sort the whole pantomime out.
Sport is for enjoyment and lots on here have said that they do not enjoy watching because there are no fans, therefore, do the sensible thing and stop it all being played, televised etc., etc and the problem is solved.
I play over-65s walking football twice a week in a properly mandated environment in Birmingham (The area around the court was Brum's worst affected 2 weeks ago though numbers have dropped to just 8 new cases last week). We returning to competitive games back in August at the earliest possible opportunity. Our 40+, 50+ and 60+ players all started their sessions at the same time whilst the 70+ players returning a couple of weeks ago. Of the club's 225 active players (men and women) during this time none have had symptoms requiring them to self isolate or get tested.

It is a proper game with tackles, marking and (minimal?) contact - all done at a slower speed maybe but the desire to win still burns brightly in all of us. Handshakes, cups of tea&coffee and visits to the pub might be out at the moment but the appropriately distanced socialisation is still happening before and after games and then we go home to our boring locked-down homes. I think it is the life outside football these young, fairly well off professionals lead that has so many of them infected or at serious risk.
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum

Jimscho
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:34 pm
Been Liked: 404 times
Has Liked: 182 times
Location: Rawtenstall

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Jimscho » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:23 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:22 pm
They were tested and Spurs kindly paid for the tests. That's how they found out how they had infections. That doesn't mean the game couldn't have been rearranged with the next round not until December.

Ells bells, with your way of thinking every little club in the country will go out of business. What then?
Tottenham play the next round next tuesday not December.

Gordaleman
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 853 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:34 pm

Jimscho wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:23 pm
Tottenham play the next round next tuesday not December.
Yes, I know that, but it could easily have been postponed as the next round isn't until December. They would have done it if it had been Spurs that were infected.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by aggi » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:35 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:46 pm
What level have the gov't capped the furlough scheme, was it equivalent of £30k p.a?

It may be a big chunk of wages, but it's not forever - and would be paid back when the club has the finances to do that.

How different would that be to the Macc players who went without being paid all their wages for some weeks?

Covid-19 is a serious situation. I'm all for football being played, but don't think we should place football players higher up the priorities that beating the virus.
That wasn't £30k and still do your full-time job though (and no guarantee of it coming back to you if these clubs end up in administration).

Macclesfield's problems started way before Covid.

Would you view it as reasonable if other businesses took the same view? If Rolls Royce said that if you want to have a job you'll have to pay for your own tests, we'll repay it at some point if all goes well.

ClaretTony
Posts: 67427
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32238 times
Has Liked: 5253 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by ClaretTony » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:43 pm

:x
Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:00 pm
This really is a ridiculous decision given the circumstances. As if lower league clubs aren't struggling enough. It just shows how out of touch with reality the FA, Football League and EPL are.

As I understand it, the next round of the cup isn't being played until December. Surely the game could have been rearranged long before then?
It’s PL, not EPL, and in any case this is just an EFL decision. The winners, Spurs now by default, play Chelsea next week.

Gordaleman
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 853 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:49 pm

As I keep saying, I know that the next round is next week but if it had been Spurs that were infected, they would almost certainly have postponed it to allow them to catch up. As it is, the little teams just don't matter any more.

JTClaret
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:51 am
Been Liked: 181 times
Has Liked: 119 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by JTClaret » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:58 pm

Why don't they play fixtures postponed for this reason during the day, during the week.
It's behind closed doors anyway, and keeps players and clubs safe.

keith1879
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:28 pm
Been Liked: 262 times
Has Liked: 363 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by keith1879 » Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:19 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:19 pm
The decision for Orient to forfeit the game was part of the competition rules. It would have been a disgrace if the agreed rules weren't enforced. The protection provided by FA/EFL is to enforce the rules - and help ensure that professional football can continue to be played during these covid times.
Agreed.
Does the rule seem reasonable?
Yes.
Did Orient know the rule in advance?
If not then it was their own fault.
Have the League applied the rule?
Yes.
Have a load of other teams who didn't get tested also come down with Covid? Remains to be seen but no evidence so far.

It seems unfair but life isn't perfect.

Ashingtonclaret46
Posts: 3771
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 1828 times
Has Liked: 2613 times
Location: Ashington, Northumberland

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Ashingtonclaret46 » Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:24 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:34 pm
Yes, I know that, but it could easily have been postponed as the next round isn't until December. They would have done it if it had been Spurs that were infected.
They wouldn't postpone it because Spurs were playing in Europe two days later so why should they postpone it if Spurs had been infected?

Elbarad
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:46 pm
Been Liked: 147 times
Has Liked: 50 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Elbarad » Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:37 pm

Maybe we can do something like this to get a bye against City!

Gordaleman
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 853 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Gordaleman » Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:39 pm

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:24 pm
They wouldn't postpone it because Spurs were playing in Europe two days later so why should they postpone it if Spurs had been infected?
What has Europe got to do with postponing a League Cup game? They could have played both outstanding games anytime between now and December without disrupting the competition at all. And as I said earlier, Spurs in particular would probably have played their reserves in both games, so it wouldn't really affect other matches they were involved in.

This is all about looking after the big clubs. If it had been Spurs with the infection, the games would have been rearranged.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by nil_desperandum » Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:37 pm

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:10 pm
They should scrap all sport until they sort the whole pantomime out.
Sport is for enjoyment and lots on here have said that they do not enjoy watching because there are no fans, therefore, do the sensible thing and stop it all being played, televised etc., etc and the problem is solved.
Are you including sport at all levels?
I want my grandchildren to carry on swimming, playing football, etc. etc.
For them to miss two or three years training and games at their age (7 & almost 9) would possibly mean that they never properly get into these activities. Better risk covid than drowning I reckon, but it's more the lack of social interaction and participation that would badly affect them.

Ashingtonclaret46
Posts: 3771
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 1828 times
Has Liked: 2613 times
Location: Ashington, Northumberland

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Ashingtonclaret46 » Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:13 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:39 pm
What has Europe got to do with postponing a League Cup game? They could have played both outstanding games anytime between now and December without disrupting the competition at all. And as I said earlier, Spurs in particular would probably have played their reserves in both games, so it wouldn't really affect other matches they were involved in.

This is all about looking after the big clubs. If it had been Spurs with the infection, the games would have been rearranged.
I didn't ask for it to be postponed --- Spurs did --- so please ask someone from the Spurs hierarchy and they will give you an answer.
In fact, from what you said , you won't need to ask Spurs because you seem to know the team that they would probably have played in this game so you must have inside information.
You also seem to have inside information about the way the EFL operate because you are sure that the game would have been re-arranged if Spurs had had the infection.
Personally, I know nothing except the facts of the matter.

Ashingtonclaret46
Posts: 3771
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 1828 times
Has Liked: 2613 times
Location: Ashington, Northumberland

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Ashingtonclaret46 » Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:26 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:37 pm
Are you including sport at all levels?
I want my grandchildren to carry on swimming, playing football, etc. etc.
For them to miss two or three years training and games at their age (7 & almost 9) would possibly mean that they never properly get into these activities. Better risk covid than drowning I reckon, but it's more the lack of social interaction and participation that would badly affect them.
No, if they deem that it is safe for youngsters to continue to do things then that is fine, the same goes for all amateur sport.
Lots of people expressed the opinion that football is not worth watching because there are no fans allowed, however, I have no problem at all with the games being played behind closed doors because --it is only a game at whatever level it is played. Broadcasters are complaining, particularly Sky, saying that it is not the same product without the crowd present --I would argue that it is because it is only a game of football.
It is the continual moans from lots of fans of all sports that fans should be let in etc., etc. because the game is not the same that makes me think that they should just stop them all so that fans can be happy.
Personally, it does not bother me one bit because whatever the sport ---it is only a game and not life or death.

Long Time Lurker
Posts: 1313
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 603 times
Has Liked: 420 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Long Time Lurker » Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:29 pm

In accordance with the rules it was right to exclude them and give Spurs a bye.

However, what would happen if a Government directive prevented two teams from playing, like a total lock-down, which team would get the bye in that case ?

When you are in uncharted waters common sense and " doing the right thing " would seem to be the best course of action. I doubt that Orient would have beaten Spurs, but by doing the right thing they are now considerably out of pocket at a time when money is tight for lower league clubs.

The rules should have included a provision for the payment of compensation payments in the event that a club is eliminated from the tournament because of Covid.

If Tottenham have any sense they will step up to the plate, compliment Orient on putting health and safety first by accepting their testing offer, and sympathise with them over the outcome. Then they should highlight the financial plight of lower league teams and how the big six aren't simply in the game for the money.

Followed by the charitable declaration that they will pay the 150K to Orient out of their own pocket, which is peanuts to them.

150K would be a cheap price for the positive ( possibly front page ) publicity that a move like that would generate.

HunterST_BFC
Posts: 3647
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 10:13 pm
Been Liked: 1402 times
Has Liked: 2687 times
Location: varied

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by HunterST_BFC » Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:36 pm

I hope Spurs keep paying for Orients testing until they are clear.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:55 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:35 pm
That wasn't £30k and still do your full-time job though (and no guarantee of it coming back to you if these clubs end up in administration).

Macclesfield's problems started way before Covid.

Would you view it as reasonable if other businesses took the same view? If Rolls Royce said that if you want to have a job you'll have to pay for your own tests, we'll repay it at some point if all goes well.
My point about the furlough scheme was that maximum 80% of wages, up to £30k p.a. was all the gov't felt was right to support, whatever non-essential job you had (remember, the essential workers were those who were required to keep working).

Agree, Macc's problems were nothing to do with covid-19. My point is that the players kept on playing - most of the time - for no wages, until they either got paid, moved to another club or Macc went bust. Certainly, a tougher situation for those footballers than being asked to pay for a few covid-19 tests.

Interesting question, specifically about RR. Yes, they are finding it difficult because air travel is very heavily cut back - and there are many redundancies as RR seeks to keep the business viable. If RR procedures required all workers to show a negative test result to come to work and required the workers to pay for it themselves, then that might be the better thing for people to agree to than the tests to be paid for by even more redundancies. Hard choices need to be made.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:02 am

keith1879 wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:19 pm
Agreed.
Does the rule seem reasonable?
Yes.
Did Orient know the rule in advance?
If not then it was their own fault.
Have the League applied the rule?
Yes.
Have a load of other teams who didn't get tested also come down with Covid? Remains to be seen but no evidence so far.

It seems unfair but life isn't perfect.
Agree. I'll bet there were one or two other L1/L2 teams were thinking that Leyton Orient were very lucky to have their game picked for tv money and the jackpot, in their terms, of £150,000. So unfair that whatever they did to get as many as 17 of their team (I think that was the number) with positive covid-19 resulted in them not collecting their tv money prize.

If the country is to win in the battle with covid-19 it would be great if a study is made of how Leyton Orient got so many positives. Were they sticking with all the FA/EFL covid-19 safe protocols? Did they let something slip? Is there something else that sport (and science) could learn from their situation?

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:20 am

Long Time Lurker wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:29 pm
In accordance with the rules it was right to exclude them and give Spurs a bye.

However, what would happen if a Government directive prevented two teams from playing, like a total lock-down, which team would get the bye in that case ?

When you are in uncharted waters common sense and " doing the right thing " would seem to be the best course of action. I doubt that Orient would have beaten Spurs, but by doing the right thing they are now considerably out of pocket at a time when money is tight for lower league clubs.

The rules should have included a provision for the payment of compensation payments in the event that a club is eliminated from the tournament because of Covid.

If Tottenham have any sense they will step up to the plate, compliment Orient on putting health and safety first by accepting their testing offer, and sympathise with them over the outcome. Then they should highlight the financial plight of lower league teams and how the big six aren't simply in the game for the money.

Followed by the charitable declaration that they will pay the 150K to Orient out of their own pocket, which is peanuts to them.

150K would be a cheap price for the positive ( possibly front page ) publicity that a move like that would generate.
Hi LTL, I guess you aren't thinking about the situation back in March, when all football was stopped, along with all other sports and most other things. So, I guess, you are thinking of a local lock-down that only applied to two local teams and, as luck would have it, they'd been drawn to play against each other. Let's say it was Bolton and Wigan, or ManU and Man City - I'm trying to pick teams that are both in the same area and are in the same division (I've lost track of Bolton and Wigan, L1/L2, I think). Let's say the situation is exactly the same is Carabao cup, the game is due to be played this week in R3 and the draw for R4 has already been made and that round is scheduled for next week. So, if both teams were able to field teams, but the game was prevented by local lockdown then, I'd expect, the R3 game would be re-scheduled, with the knock-on re-scheduling of R4. However, if one team was unable to play, they didn't have the required 14 covid-19 negative players, then that team would forfeit the game and the other team would proceed to R4.

It seems Spurs fans have been very generous to Orient and have spent a lot of money in their (on-line) club shop.

I'm not sure why Orient merit compensation. Something has gone wrong at their club. They are supposed to have steps in place that limit the risk of the squad catching covid-19. Those procedure appear to have broken down. It doesn't sound to me that Orient have put health and safety first. I wonder if we will ever find out what went wrong?

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by nil_desperandum » Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:40 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:20 am

I'm not sure why Orient merit compensation. Something has gone wrong at their club. They are supposed to have steps in place that limit the risk of the squad catching covid-19. Those procedure appear to have broken down. It doesn't sound to me that Orient have put health and safety first. I wonder if we will ever find out what went wrong?
That may be true, but given that most other lower division teams aren't being tested, how can you prove that the disease isn't equally rife at other clubs? It's mainly asymptomatic in players of that age as you know, and so there could be a number of other clubs where a number of players would give a positive result.
And how do you know where or how they caught it? It only needs one of them to pick it up from one of their children who has been back at school, and they could then "take the virus into work". I don't think physical contact is banned on the training ground, if it's part of a practice game, so the disease could then be transmitted.
Apparently the League Two club have been asking players to complete medical questionnaires each morning and they are being tested once a month, with each test costing about £100. Maybe they could do more, but are other Div 2 clubs?
On the other hand, as you imply, Orient themselves may not have followed the rules, but I don't think they've been accused of anything have they?

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:30 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 12:40 pm
That may be true, but given that most other lower division teams aren't being tested, how can you prove that the disease isn't equally rife at other clubs? It's mainly asymptomatic in players of that age as you know, and so there could be a number of other clubs where a number of players would give a positive result.
And how do you know where or how they caught it? It only needs one of them to pick it up from one of their children who has been back at school, and they could then "take the virus into work". I don't think physical contact is banned on the training ground, if it's part of a practice game, so the disease could then be transmitted.
Apparently the League Two club have been asking players to complete medical questionnaires each morning and they are being tested once a month, with each test costing about £100. Maybe they could do more, but are other Div 2 clubs?
On the other hand, as you imply, Orient themselves may not have followed the rules, but I don't think they've been accused of anything have they?
Hi nil_d, agree with all you say. I'd expect that any player who has got covid-19 and is asymptomatic will answer "no" to the daily questions "have you got any covid-19 symptoms?" It would be interesting to know if the questions extend to "Who have you been in contact with?" "Have any of your contacts been in situations where they may have been infected with covid-19?" "Are any of your family/household/other contacts reporting any covid-19 symptoms?" There may also be further questions that could be added, I don't claim any expertise.

So far as Orient's 17 positives, it would be interesting to research: did one player bring covid-19 to the group? was that the single source of the infection on all the other players? and what answers did the single source give each day on their questionnaire? what responses did all the other players give each day leading to the positive tests? were any of the players simply ticking the form exactly the same every day, with a risk that they were ticking it off without thinking about the questions and their answers? The aim of the research would be to examine how effective the protocols are, whether there are gaps in the protocols or whether it is human behaviours that result in the protocols breaking down.

Alongside Orient, it would be interesting to look at what WHU did and how only Moyes and 2 players were infected in their case. I'd assume that they'd all been active in training in the period leading up to the squad being named and heading to the London Stadium.

Are there differences between how WHU are addressing covid-19 protocols and how Orient were? Does 3 v 17 demonstrate that there are benefits in the WHU approach v Orient approach?

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by aggi » Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:36 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:30 pm
...

Are there differences between how WHU are addressing covid-19 protocols and how Orient were? Does 3 v 17 demonstrate that there are benefits in the WHU approach v Orient approach?
I'd imagine the major difference is regular testing at West Ham.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:12 am

aggi wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:36 am
I'd imagine the major difference is regular testing at West Ham.
Just that? WHU 3 players/coach positive identified immediately before game; Orient 17 players positive identified immediately before game. How come covid-19 infected 17 at Orient but only 3 at WHU? Where the squads not equally spending time together as they prepared for their games? I feel a deeper look might yield some further learnings that would help with safer protocols - or, because we can't rule it out, that it is really important that the protocols are kept to by all the players. 17 at Orient suggests to me that they had their guards too low.

EDIT: Of course, we should also confirm that WHU had only 3 positives and that there was no gap in their procedures that resulted in other unidentified positives being missed.
Last edited by Paul Waine on Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

bobinho
Posts: 9247
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Been Liked: 4070 times
Has Liked: 6535 times
Location: Burnley

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by bobinho » Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:31 am

Dyched wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:49 pm
Football isn’t only on the pitch. Coaches to games, changing rooms at grounds, training ground, canteen/restaurant, treatment rooms etc etc.
Only what’s happening on the pitch isn’t controlled by social distancing. No difference in the training ground to the match day. Same people. Going into the restaurant after the game should be tightly controlled, as that would protect the canteen staff, as should travelling arrangements and treatment rooms. There really should only be a slightly higher risk for 30 or so people each game. Balance that with the risk of spending ten hours in a pub, or a rave, or an illegal house party.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by aggi » Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:18 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:12 am
Just that? WHU 3 players/coach positive identified immediately before game; Orient 17 players positive identified immediately before game. How come covid-19 infected 17 at Orient but only 3 at WHU? Where the squads not equally spending time together as they prepared for their games? I feel a deeper look might yield some further learnings that would help with safer protocols - or, because we can't rule it out, that it is really important that the protocols are kept to by all the players. 17 at Orient suggests to me that they had their guards too low.

EDIT: Of course, we should also confirm that WHU had only 3 positives and that there was no gap in their procedures that resulted in other unidentified positives being missed.
But West Ham are being tested very regularly so there's a good chance of catching it before it spreads to other players/staff. Orient weren't.

It's pretty much the whole basis of the track and trace strategy.

Dyched
Posts: 5938
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 12:34 am
Been Liked: 1921 times
Has Liked: 446 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Dyched » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:26 pm

bobinho wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:31 am
Only what’s happening on the pitch isn’t controlled by social distancing. No difference in the training ground to the match day. Same people. Going into the restaurant after the game should be tightly controlled, as that would protect the canteen staff, as should travelling arrangements and treatment rooms. There really should only be a slightly higher risk for 30 or so people each game. Balance that with the risk of spending ten hours in a pub, or a rave, or an illegal house party.
But you have that group of 30 meeting another group of 30 every week. These are also young men that at most will have children in school, who will visit families grandparents. There’s a rule of 6. I know that not workplace based but football has a more social aspect than most jobs eg, the travelling, lunch/dinners.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Leyton Orient - and the action taken against them

Post by Paul Waine » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:30 am

Dyched wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:26 pm
But you have that group of 30 meeting another group of 30 every week. These are also young men that at most will have children in school, who will visit families grandparents. There’s a rule of 6. I know that not workplace based but football has a more social aspect than most jobs eg, the travelling, lunch/dinners.
From report in The Times, it appears that EFL are taking steps to ensure covid-10 protocols are maintained by EFL clubs.

EFL will use ‘snooper squads’ to ensure clubs are following Covid rules
Martyn Ziegler, Chief Sports Reporter
Friday October 02 2020, 5.00pm, The Times

Clubs in the EFL have been warned that “snooper squads” will be carrying out surprise swoops on training grounds and stadiums to make sure players and staff are abiding by coronavirus protocols.

The 72 clubs were told this week that the EFL would be employing audit teams to keep them on their toes throughout the season. The inspection teams will make sure that clubs are following rules such as temperature checks and players not eating together, and that staff and players are maintaining social distancing, including when travelling on coaches.

There is no regular testing in the EFL for the virus, unlike in the Premier League where players and staff are tested every week.

To do so in the three lower divisions would cost £12 million over the course of the season, a big ask with the EFL already on course to lose £200 million. EFL insiders say that the money was not the main issue but that medical advisers suggested following protocols, rather than testing, reduced the risk of infection.

Clubs who are breaching protocols face being investigated, charged and sanctioned by the EFL, which is still probing the situation at Leyton Orient where about 20 players and staff went down with the virus, causing the club to forfeit their Carabao Cup tie against Tottenham Hotspur.

EFL clubs with international players will be obliged to undertake a round of testing after the international break or if they have given players an extended break of more than three days. There is also mandatory testing before any cup match against top-flight opposition, which will be paid for by the Premier League.

Post Reply