So, today is the day that Boris says certain occupations should return to work if they can't do so from home which, by coincidence or design, has contrived to thrust football back into the limelight. I've got to admit, of all things I've been missing in this lockdown, football has been the lowest of my priorities. Apart from a brief fix, a month ago when, one Sunday afternoon, the BBC replayed England's infamous Italia '90 semi-final against West Germany, the sport has dropped off my radar. I've not even been bothered by what's happened to the rest of my Chelsea season ticket entitlement or, frankly, whether or not Liverpool should just be handed the title and we all get on with our lives.
Bill Shankly's oft-quoted line about the game ("Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.") has been put into sharp perspective by the coronavirus. On one hand, it is no more important than any other part of the entertainment industry. True, for those who love the game it's as nourishing for the soul as an uplifting gig, a compelling film or an engrossing book, but ultimately, there are far more important things right now to be concerned with. Football does, however, have a perennial ability to keep itself in the news. Like a Z-list celebrity, calling paparazzi ahead of leaving their front door dressed in a skimpy outfit, just to keep up visibility, football has the knack of shoehorning itself into the public consciousness, even when it least warrants attention. That moment is now.
To be fair, I suppose, football is no different to any other business activity, desperate to figure out how to resume in the face of a contagion that, despite the daily "trajectory", shows no signs of abating. For many Premier League clubs, the vast sums of money that swill about in the competition from TV rights and sponsors eager for brand awareness are keeping them mostly afloat. For those lower down in the top flight's financial rankings, as well as those in the Football League, where the revenue from every last cheeseburger sold on a Saturday afternoon contributes to the bottom line, the eagerness to get back to work is understandable.
The trouble is, it still feels too soon. The latest view is that the British government could rule that "elite" sport would be allowed to return from June 1st, with Premier League fixtures resuming on the 12th. But between now and then, a lot of ground needs to be covered, not the least how the season's remaining fixtures could be scheduled and what that means - during a period when players would normally be preparing for the next season - for the 2020-21 competition. However, even before then, there are far more critical issues to cover.
Over the next couple of days, the footballers' 'union', the PFA and the football manager's professional body, the LMA, will meet to discuss the medical protocols needed before anyone is likely to kick a ball in anger. Various players, including Kyle Walker and Raheem Stirling, have expressed their concerns about the health risks of football returning too soon, with black and ethnic minority players most worried, given the apparent prevalence of COVID-19 in their community. Football authorities are also supposed to be meeting Oliver Dowden, the Culture Secretary, this week to discuss how to get football up and running again (the so-called 'Project Restart'), with the Premier League clubs meeting next Monday and a UEFA deadline for leagues to submit their restart plans looming on the 25th.
However, a preliminary step towards any semblance of football coming back will be clubs recommencing training. The BBC reports today that it has seen official protocols sent to Premier League clubs which instruct them on the "strict" observation of social distancing, a ban on tackling and players restricted to groups of five during training sessions. On top of this, corner-flags, balls, goalposts and even playing surfaces must be disinfected after each session. Much of that makes sense...but a ban on tackling? If that's where the protocols are going - football is a partial contact sport, after all - I can see the season being decided on penalties.
There are other practicalities. In Germany, a planned restoration of the Bundesliga was held up after two Dynamo Dresden players tested positive for COVID-19, forcing the rest of the squad into quarantine. Here, you could imagine a constant stream of delays - if one player develops symptoms does that mean 14 days' quarantine for the rest of the squad? And what if another player develops symptoms in the midst of that 14-day period - does the quarantine go into a new cycle?
Some English clubs have been looking at these practicalities for some time. Wolves will this week become the first Premier League club to try out a virus testing programme, using a drive-through facility at the club's training ground, an experiment that could be rolled out across the rest of the league. In Germany, Bundesliga players have been set strict rules on social distancing, banning any physical contact with neighbours or members of the public, not allowing visitors into their homes or being allowed to use public transport (with the rules applyuing to everyone else in the players' household). In Italy, Serie A clubs face a mandatory quarantine of 14 days if any player tests positive for the coronavirus. The prospects, then, for anything like a smooth return for the game everywhere else are still open to question. The UK death toll from the coronavirus appears to be falling, but the attrition rate is still the equivalent of two packed airliners crashing every day. Even if the average 'trajectory' suggests the number of new infections, too, is slowing, COVID-19 is still out there, and still wrecking lives and livelihoods. The Prime Minister, himself, even said in today's PMQs that the infection rate rise in countries where lockdown has been eased “is a warning to us not to proceed too quickly”.
Footballers, then, are no different to anyone else, of course, and are fearful of what contracting the virus might mean for family members and loved ones. But there is also a more serious consideration for footballers and, indeed, any athlete, in that COVID-19 has potentially long-lasting complications for lung and heart health, in other words, a sportsman or woman's engine room. Of course, most professional footballers are supremely fit and healthy to begin with, and can probably cope with the virus better than others. But we know, from national evidence, that the virus doesn't just kill the elderly and the frail, or those with cancer or diabetes. Some, who were otherwise perfectly healthy, have succumbed to the contagion.
The BBC's Dan Roan this morning reported that it's believed that a number of players have contacted the PFA over concerns about underlying health conditions like asthma as well as the prevailing fear about the higher prevalence of deaths in the black and ethnic minority community, with black men and women reportedly nearly twice as likely to die from COVID-19 as white people in England and Wales. The issue of players returning to competitive football overshadows all other considerations, in my view. Playing in empty and neutral stadia is one thing, but the players need to be motivated (and, yes, I know, earning £100,000 a week is fairly persuasive motivation for kicking a ball). But as a spectator, forced to watch the season played out on YouTube, I could probably tolerate a game coming from the souless echo of a bare ground, but not when the players are shying away from tackling, and the game is reduced to one of kick-and-rush. The concerns coming from the players themselves should be taken seriously. The financial argument is compelling, but every worker has the right not to return to work if they feel their working environment is unsafe and I don't think football's implausibly-remunerated princes should be put at any greater risk than the rest of us.
No comments:
Post a Comment