Home Match Day Thread 3/10/20 L1 - OUFC v Crewe Alexandra

Ian said:

It's disappointing that what David Artell is reported to have said on this forum, and what he actually said are very different.

There is clearly a need to be testing players, something KR has been saying, and something David Artell mentioned in his interview.

The league needs to take the pressure off clubs to play, and tests need conducting... What was it that the hopeless Matt Hancock/Wancock & BoJ promised us?

Test, test, test was supposed to prevent incidents like today. It's difficult to get a test, because this nation lacks leadership, too many people are promoted because of their mates, rather than ability. The misrepresentation of what David Artell has said enables those truly at fault to escape scrutiny.

Let's be grateful that a Crewe player took it upon themselves to test.

Crewe should not have been at the ground after the test, but... Following the positive test earlier this week, the Government should have ensured that all players and staff of Crewe FC could be tested.

Click to expand...

Manorlounger said:

1. Crewe did know hours before, they have said as much. It wasn't "leaked" it was talked about via social media and rumour. They very cleverly avoided making anything official until after they arrived at the Kasstad. And, it was only very late this afternoon that it was made public that Omar Beckles was the player who had tested positive.

2. Officially OUFC did not know and could therefore, not comment publicly. (Crewe should have taken the lead and not turned up)

3. Given the implications of infection and isolating and games not taking place, I would have thought that this was a reasonable argument to make. The schedule is already overloaded. KR referred to being expected to field a side for nearly every Tuesday, Saturday for the rest of the season, clearly not ideal to say the least. Many clubs will just not manage this with the added situation of salary caps etc. ( another factor somehow ignored by those voting in favour of the cap) With no chance of supporters returning in the foreseeable future many clubs will be resigned to facing financial ruin and would have to see shutting down and possibly folding completely as inevitable. Completing the season may well be the last thing they are contemplating.

You talk of malice, very, very unlikely but, reckless, yes, irresponsible, yes.
There is clearly grounds for Crewe to face censure. Clearly grounds for education. Grounds for legal action under HMG directives, possibly. I am no legal eagle.

I get that you wish to put a positive spin on things but, in this instance I believe you may be pushing it a little too far.

Click to expand...

Ian said:

It's disappointing that what David Artell is reported to have said on this forum, and what he actually said are very different.

There is clearly a need to be testing players, something KR has been saying, and something David Artell mentioned in his interview.

The league needs to take the pressure off clubs to play, and tests need conducting... What was it that the hopeless Matt Hancock/Wancock & BoJ promised us?

Test, test, test was supposed to prevent incidents like today. It's difficult to get a test, because this nation lacks leadership, too many people are promoted because of their mates, rather than ability. The misrepresentation of what David Artell has said enables those truly at fault to escape scrutiny.

Let's be grateful that a Crewe player took it upon themselves to test.

Crewe should not have been at the ground after the test, but... Following the positive test earlier this week, the Government should have ensured that all players and staff of Crewe FC could be tested.

Click to expand...

Scotchegg said:

If it was talked about via social media and rumour, and I both heard it and previously worked at the club, I think I'd raise my concerns specifically with them rather than put a coded cryptic post on here. The last thing ANYONE should do is leave the club and all of those involved with match day, at risk of infection. This is far too important for point scoring on an obscure internet football forum!!!

Click to expand...

Ian said:

Let's be grateful that a Crewe player took it upon themselves to test.

Crewe should not have been at the ground after the test, but... Following the positive test earlier this week, the Government should have ensured that all players and staff of Crewe FC could be tested.

Click to expand...

Oldman159 said:

https://bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08t8zns link repeated for clarity...

Click to expand...

Oldman159 said:

https://bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08t8zns link repeated for clarity...

Click to expand...

Manorlounger said:

Oh come on!
If the social media and rumour originated from within the club, how would that work?

By the way, I heard that prisons are full of very nice folk who are completely innocent of any crimes. Let them out, is what I say.

Click to expand...

oufc1991 said:

Should it be mandatory that if you can’t play a fixture because a player or players in your team have Covid then you forfeit isn’t that what happened to orient in the cup or was that different either way after the way Crewe have behaved today knowing that player had Covid they should be made to forfeit they could have infected our whole team wankers

Click to expand...

Manorlounger said:

I don't get that at all. All players and staff can be tested if they wish. They all have the option to do exactly what Omar Beckles and his team mate Ryan Wintle did do, get a test. They paid to go private because they wished to circumnavigate the public route. That's perfectly fair, they are professional sportsman and need a quick result.
The Premiership and Championship clubs pay for their staff to be tested because they wish to stay in business. Leagues 1 & 2 have less finance but still realise that if they wish to field a team they will have to find a way to afford the testing. OUFC do so, they take responsibility and recognise their duty of care towards staff and players alike.
David Artell loses all credibility because of his naive and irresponsible attitude towards covid-19. He imagines that having negative test results means business as usual. He ignores the implications of a positive test result for the rest of his squad, let alone his club.

Click to expand...

Scotchegg said:

So are you suggesting that rumours originated from inside the club, but that they still allowed potentially infected people into the club, past the staff doing temperature checks, through the stadium, into the changing rooms, before challenging those involved?

That isn't just reckless by Crewe but also by those with in our own club who, we are told, knew all about this?

Click to expand...

m said:

Absolutely no attempt to defend Artell or Crewe's actions here, these are indefensible.

For me the point that @Ian makes that rings true is on testing.

Absolutely no reason why the public purse should pay for week in, week out testing of players, that's not fair or right.

But, when someone tests positive, and others may be affected, whilst going about their daily working routines, with all the rhetoric re 'test, test, test', and trumpeting of capacity....well....it's a failing, surely?

Click to expand...

Manorlounger said:

You have said it yourself, rumours. (and, not from within the club) Like most responsible businesses OUFC waited to hear substantive information. What would you have thought? Bus turns up at the entrance to your nick, loaded up with new inmates one of whom has managed to get hold of a mobile and has tweeted his mate, on the inside, that he has tested positive. Rumour is rife, but nothing through official channels. What would you do? What if there is no truth in the rumour? Still going to tell your governor? Turn them away without proof?

That Crewe decided to roll up at the ground would have been, for most, proof that the rumours were false. What happened thereafter is down to the irresponsibility of Crewe and their officials and management.
We can't all be ITK all the time.

Click to expand...

Kamal said:

Who outside the club knew?

Click to expand...

Manorlounger said:

Who said anything about the "public purse"? Clubs have paid for testing out of their own pockets, always have.

There is no reason for a political discussion here. The argument about testing in the public domain has no place in this discussion.
If there is an argument to be had it is over whether the EFL, PFA or the individual clubs should be paying. My preference, all three.

Click to expand...

Scotchegg said:

Seeing as you reference my work, I'll tell you exactly what we do. We hold the prison van, temperature check and complete an initial health care assessment of each new reception in a sterile room before allowing further entry. We certainly do not allow them to mingle or enter communal areas putting others at risk. Any positive cases, or even those in high risk categories are isolated immediately.

In these circumstances with a football team arriving, any information, even a rumour, that there was someone onboard the club bus with an infection should have meant that no one left that bus and entered the stadium. No one.

But this assumes that the club did know, as Ryan says. But I simply don't believe that anyone would have been so negligent. I actually don't think Ryan even knew. Just looking for a reaction, which on one level is pretty sad, but on another it is incredibly dangerous given the circumstances.

Character assassination or not, I'm just not buying it.

Click to expand...