Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

EFL: Covid passports may be only way of averting 'dramatic financial effect' of fans not returning

Covid passports may be the only way of averting the "dramatic financial effect" of fans not returning to stadiums for the start of next season, according to the Football League.

There has been opposition to the method in which the government is planning to open up large-scale events, which have effectively been closed to the public for more than a year.

For football, that is likely to require either proof of a negative test, or a vaccination or the presence of antibodies to gain access to stadiums, with further testing being likely after the event.

The plan has been described as "divisive and discriminatory" by opponents.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56668965

Comments

  • I guess people are a little worried that it might pave the way for other "certificates".

    For instance, a certificate which proved you had no police cautions or arrests within the past ten years.

    This would probably enable clubs to permit drinking, grass banks or terracing, end of crowd segregation and create a much friendlier atmosphere for everyone. Might be useful to a lot of businesses which wanted a better class of customer- or could be made compulsory for pubs?

    Then there's the credit "certificate" which proves that you don't owe anybody any money. (Oops I  think  we already have that  :o:open_mouth:)
  • cafcfan said:
    You can kind of tell that people like Corbyn and IDS do not and probably never have lived in the real world. All this bluster about vaccine certificates being divisive and discriminatory. What a load of bollocks.

    The whole world is already full of stuff like this: drivers' licences; Tesco's policy of not selling alcohol or knives to anyone that looks under 25 unless they can prove they are over 18; Passports; existing vaccination certificates for various diseases when travelling abroad; lawyers' practising certificates; pilots' licences; criminal background checks; etc, etc.

    Probably a good example in this context is that if you want to be a professional boxer you have to have evidence of commencement of Hepatitis B vaccinations. 

    None of these things are a pointless, bureaucratic waste of time. They are all there to make us safer and/or more competent. 

    What can possibly be wrong with having to prove to a pub landlord that you are not a risk to his other customers?

    Nice work linking Liberals and corbyn to this, you've absolutely nailed it though because while I'd question where a vaccine passport leads to, I also believe that a 9 year old should be able to buy a bread knife and a bottle of rum if he so desires. 
  • JamesSeed said:
    We’ve had to have vaccination certificates to visit certain parts of the world for years. Would people call that discriminatory? Personally, if it’s the only way to save lots of clubs going bust I don’t see anything wrong with it. 
    I wish 'vaccine passport' would be dropped, because that's absolutely not what it is. 

    If I have to arrive early to be tested, so I can shout like a nutter in the cupboard for 90 mins... then swab me up. 
  • I guess people are a little worried that it might pave the way for other "certificates".

    For instance, a certificate which proved you had no police cautions or arrests within the past ten years.

    This would probably enable clubs to permit drinking, grass banks or terracing, end of crowd segregation and create a much friendlier atmosphere for everyone. Might be useful to a lot of businesses which wanted a better class of customer- or could be made compulsory for pubs?

    Then there's the credit "certificate" which proves that you don't owe anybody any money. (Oops I  think  we already have that  :o:open_mouth:)
    That already exists, it’s called a DBS certificate. You need one for most jobs these days 
  • JamesSeed said:
    We’ve had to have vaccination certificates to visit certain parts of the world for years. Would people call that discriminatory? Personally, if it’s the only way to save lots of clubs going bust I don’t see anything wrong with it. 
    Of course it's discriminatory.  If it's not discriminatory, it's completely pointless.  It's intended to discriminate.  

    The question shouldn't be whether it's discriminatory, but whether it's fair.  It would be unfair to have a 'passport' system that requires someone to prove they have had a vaccine when they haven't been offered one.  So, as long as it's introduced after everyone has had the chance of having a vaccine, then it's fair. 

    It must be fair. But it must also be discriminatory.  
  • edited April 8
    Chizz said:
    shine166 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    We’ve had to have vaccination certificates to visit certain parts of the world for years. Would people call that discriminatory? Personally, if it’s the only way to save lots of clubs going bust I don’t see anything wrong with it. 
    I wish 'vaccine passport' would be dropped, because that's absolutely not what it is. 

    If I have to arrive early to be tested, so I can shout like a nutter in the cupboard for 90 mins... then swab me up. 
    100% agree with this.  I wish people who use the expression were asked 'which ports does it allow you to pass?'  It's not a passport at all, in the same way that an MOT certificate is not a passport.  

    It's a certificate.  
    .... plus vaccine is only 1 part of it. I guess 'The, I didn't have covid 19, when I had a test 48 hours ago certificate' isn't quite as catchy.
  • From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited April 8
    Never going to happen. How would they check this at 2:50PM at the away end of Millwall, Fulham Palace etc when most people are pissed etc. Is this another job we are going to give to a minimum wage steward to check before the game before entering the turnstiles. 


  • Chizz said:
    JamesSeed said:
    We’ve had to have vaccination certificates to visit certain parts of the world for years. Would people call that discriminatory? Personally, if it’s the only way to save lots of clubs going bust I don’t see anything wrong with it. 
    Of course it's discriminatory.  If it's not discriminatory, it's completely pointless.  It's intended to discriminate.  

    The question shouldn't be whether it's discriminatory, but whether it's fair.  It would be unfair to have a 'passport' system that requires someone to prove they have had a vaccine when they haven't been offered one.  So, as long as it's introduced after everyone has had the chance of having a vaccine, then it's fair. 

    It must be fair. But it must also be discriminatory.  
    It would be nice if it was “fair” but we are dealing with a virus that is most definitely not “fair”.

     We have 3 options.  Option 1 is to introduce a passport or certificate now (probably impossible) and restrict access to various establishments (pubs, restaurants etc) to those that have the certificate.  Option 2 is to keep those establishments closed until everyone has been offered a jab (plus had 2no jab, plus 2 weeks for it to work fully.  That won’t work as it’s not “fair” on the owners of the establishments.

    Option 3 is to run a hybrid system until everyone has had their jabs.  This allows establishments to choose; either allow anyone in but maintain high Covid security and, say, a 25% max capacity OR only permit entry to those with certificates BUT run a more relaxed Covid security and 75-100% capacity.  This surely is “fair” to everyone.
  • Windy said:
    From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
    Also, football clubs are private businesses, so can they not impose what is basically a health & safety restriction if they want to? Yes, they might be taken to court by an anti-vaxxer refused admission, but would the anti-vaxxer win? I doubt it.
    I think there’ll be an announcement re limited crowds returning soonish. Hope so anyway. 
  • Never going to happen. How would they check this at 2:50PM at the away end of Millwall, Fulham Palace etc when most people are pissed etc. Is this another job we are going to give to a minimum wage steward to check before the game before entering the turnstiles. 


    I think it would only work when crowds are limited and there are no away fans. 
  • JamesSeed said:
    Windy said:
    From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
    Also, football clubs are private businesses, so can they not impose what is basically a health & safety restriction if they want to? Yes, they might be taken to court by an anti-vaxxer refused admission, but would the anti-vaxxer win? I doubt it.
    I think there’ll be an announcement re limited crowds returning soonish. Hope so anyway. 
    all you would need is a disclaimer when selling tickets "anyone who fails to produce proof of vaccination or negative test result will be refused entry and no refunds given"
  • JamesSeed said:
    Never going to happen. How would they check this at 2:50PM at the away end of Millwall, Fulham Palace etc when most people are pissed etc. Is this another job we are going to give to a minimum wage steward to check before the game before entering the turnstiles. 


    I think it would only work when crowds are limited and there are no away fans. 
    Yep, I'm guessing home fans only for next season 
  • JamesSeed said:
    Never going to happen. How would they check this at 2:50PM at the away end of Millwall, Fulham Palace etc when most people are pissed etc. Is this another job we are going to give to a minimum wage steward to check before the game before entering the turnstiles. 


    I think it would only work when crowds are limited and there are no away fans. 
    Article says full crowds. 
  • Good idea, it will not only encourage people to get vaccinated when their time comes but also to get tested regularly until that time which in turn will pick up more asymptotic cases. 
  • JamesSeed said:
    Never going to happen. How would they check this at 2:50PM at the away end of Millwall, Fulham Palace etc when most people are pissed etc. Is this another job we are going to give to a minimum wage steward to check before the game before entering the turnstiles. 


    I think it would only work when crowds are limited and there are no away fans. 
    Article says full crowds. 
    Didn’t see the article. Will take a look. 
    I’d be surprised if we suddenly went from zero crowds to full crowds, but you never know. I suppose with certificates etc the arguments for tiny crowds are diminished?
  • The point is that when things open back up is it fair on the majority of people who have had the vaccine to potentially be exposed to people who have refused ? Imo it's easy. If you refuse the vaccine that is your choice but you shouldn't be allowed to mix at public events. My business involves engineers visiting people in their homes. Once the vaccine roll out is complete when booking appointments the customer will be given a choice of insisting they want an engineer who has had the vaccine. If most do we have no idea what that will mean to our employees who havent had it
  • Sponsored links:


  • cafcfan said:
    You can kind of tell that people like Corbyn and IDS do not and probably never have lived in the real world. All this bluster about vaccine certificates being divisive and discriminatory. What a load of bollocks.

    The whole world is already full of stuff like this: drivers' licences; Tesco's policy of not selling alcohol or knives to anyone that looks under 25 unless they can prove they are over 18; Passports; existing vaccination certificates for various diseases when travelling abroad; lawyers' practising certificates; pilots' licences; criminal background checks; etc, etc.

    Probably a good example in this context is that if you want to be a professional boxer you have to have evidence of commencement of Hepatitis B vaccinations. 

    None of these things are a pointless, bureaucratic waste of time. They are all there to make us safer and/or more competent. 

    What can possibly be wrong with having to prove to a pub landlord that you are not a risk to his other customers?

    If this were Twitter I would certain this was from a bot account.

    @firstnamefollowedbylotsnumbers
  • _MrDick said:
    I guess people are a little worried that it might pave the way for other "certificates".

    For instance, a certificate which proved you had no police cautions or arrests within the past ten years.

    This would probably enable clubs to permit drinking, grass banks or terracing, end of crowd segregation and create a much friendlier atmosphere for everyone. Might be useful to a lot of businesses which wanted a better class of customer- or could be made compulsory for pubs?

    Then there's the credit "certificate" which proves that you don't owe anybody any money. (Oops I  think  we already have that  :o:open_mouth:)
    That already exists, it’s called a DBS certificate. You need one for most jobs these days 
    I've actually got one of these in front of me as I type! I needed it to do some voluntary driving.

    It doesn't have a photo or passport number on it so it would be pretty useless as a check for entry to pubs etc.

    Not really bothered but the idea of these being provided with photos like driving licenses does make me shudder a bit! I would guess there is no real appetite for having to carry round your "DBS card" to get into a pub or hire a car or stay in a hotel. 
  • JamesSeed said:
    Windy said:
    From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
    Also, football clubs are private businesses, so can they not impose what is basically a health & safety restriction if they want to? Yes, they might be taken to court by an anti-vaxxer refused admission, but would the anti-vaxxer win? I doubt it.
    I think there’ll be an announcement re limited crowds returning soonish. Hope so anyway. 
    all you would need is a disclaimer when selling tickets "anyone who fails to produce proof of vaccination or negative test result will be refused entry and no refunds given"
    Similarly, there could be a disclaimer saying: There may be people in the stadium who have not been vaccinated. You now have the choice to make a personal risk assessment, something you have been doing for most of your life.
    If you feel your personal well being will be threatened in any way by attending, then don't come.

  • Redskin said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Windy said:
    From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
    Also, football clubs are private businesses, so can they not impose what is basically a health & safety restriction if they want to? Yes, they might be taken to court by an anti-vaxxer refused admission, but would the anti-vaxxer win? I doubt it.
    I think there’ll be an announcement re limited crowds returning soonish. Hope so anyway. 
    all you would need is a disclaimer when selling tickets "anyone who fails to produce proof of vaccination or negative test result will be refused entry and no refunds given"
    Similarly, there could be a disclaimer saying: There may be people in the stadium who have not been vaccinated. You now have the choice to make a personal risk assessment, something you have been doing for most of your life.
    If you feel your personal well being will be threatened in any way by attending, then don't come.

    That is rubbish mate. Why should people who have taken the rational decision to accept the vaccine to protect themselves and society as a whole have to make a risk assessment to decide if they should stand next to a twat that hasnt
  • JamesSeed said:
    We’ve had to have vaccination certificates to visit certain parts of the world for years. Would people call that discriminatory? Personally, if it’s the only way to save lots of clubs going bust I don’t see anything wrong with it. 
    Yes, because the vaccination for travel certificates discriminates between those that can afford to travel to those countries and those that can’t.

    The possibility of a vaccination certificate on your mobile phone is another discrimination in the making. The test and trace app was a total waste of space because it discriminated between those that had a fairly new smart phone and those that didn’t (my iPhone 6 I was using at the start of the pandemic excluded me from signing up) and therefore probably excluded the old and poor who may have been more likely to be more vulnerable to COVID. If they go down that route as well then half the supporter base will be prevented from going to a game whether they’ve been vaccinated or not.
  • edited April 9
    JamesSeed said:
    Windy said:
    From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
    Also, football clubs are private businesses, so can they not impose what is basically a health & safety restriction if they want to? Yes, they might be taken to court by an anti-vaxxer refused admission, but would the anti-vaxxer win? I doubt it.
    I think there’ll be an announcement re limited crowds returning soonish. Hope so anyway. 
    Only if it’s lawful, just as they can’t exclude women, ethnic minorities or disabled people because they are private businesses. 

    I think this issue has to be driven by public health and public health alone. I wouldn’t trust “football“ to make any decisions on the basis of the best interests of fans, which is the whole point of safety certificates overseen by local authorities. “Football” cannot be trusted to decide what is safe.
  • JamesSeed said:
    Windy said:
    From what I've read opposition to vaccination certificates runs across the different parties. So this isn't a left- right issue.

    I understand the objection if vaccine passports prevented people from accessing basic services like healthcare, dentists, supermarkets etc.

    What I don't yet understand is why vaccine passports for discretionary entertainment events is a problem, given that they will reduce the risk of virus spreading and arguably make people more likely to attend matches for example.   
    Also, football clubs are private businesses, so can they not impose what is basically a health & safety restriction if they want to? Yes, they might be taken to court by an anti-vaxxer refused admission, but would the anti-vaxxer win? I doubt it.
    I think there’ll be an announcement re limited crowds returning soonish. Hope so anyway. 
    Only if it’s lawful, just as they can’t exclude women, ethnic minorities or disabled people because they are private businesses. 

    I think this issue has to be driven by public health and public health alone. I wouldn’t trust “football“ to make any decisions on the basis of the best interests of fans, which is the whole point of safety certificates overseen by local authorities. “Football” cannot be trusted to decide what is safe. to do anything 

  • Vaccine passports are pointless, if we go by the current scientific evidence, of which there isn't much that is agreed on, we have been told that having the vaccine gives you less than 100% chance of being immune to getting Covid-19, but if you do get it, symptoms will be mild. We are also told that it is not certain that having the vaccine means you cannot be asymptomatic or a carrier and pass it on. Given that, I can see why you might need to be able to show a negative test result, but not why you'd need a passport. The vaccine protects you, not anyone else.
  • Saga Lout said:
    Vaccine passports are pointless, if we go by the current scientific evidence, of which there isn't much that is agreed on, we have been told that having the vaccine gives you less than 100% chance of being immune to getting Covid-19, but if you do get it, symptoms will be mild. We are also told that it is not certain that having the vaccine means you cannot be asymptomatic or a carrier and pass it on. Given that, I can see why you might need to be able to show a negative test result, but not why you'd need a passport. The vaccine protects you, not anyone else.
    This ignores the fact that the virus can mutate and then who knows who will be protected then.
    Those turning up without having had a vaccine or a certificate to say they are COVID free could have it and pass it onto others, or catch it, and allow the chance for the virus to mutate. Threatening us all again, filling hospitals and preventing others with serious issues being able to get treatment, and maybe another lockdown.

    Everyone will be given the opportunity to take the vaccine and for free. Each personal decision comes with risk and maybe consequences. 
    It should not mean that anyone has the right to put others in danger. Prove you cannot pass on COVID or don’t go. Protect everyone’s freedom.
    Vaccine, Test, or No go.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!