Home Match Day Thread 13-10-2020 L1 OUFC v Crewe Alexandra (2nd attempt MATCH OFF)

[Oldman159]

So, Questions for ‘Crewe’, (both poster and club) do you have any idea who ‘blew the whistle’ from within the Crewe camp? Was it indeed a disgruntled person who felt the club had maybe been negligent by not getting everyone tested? Was there a general feeling that, if everyone kept quiet, then the 1st game would go ahead?

But when the team arrived at the Kashstad they discovered Oxford already knew......

Could that same ‘whistle blower’ not say what were the circumstances surrounding the second call off?

Also Asking for a friend.

 

[m]

What do you suggest is the point of taking the test at all then, if not prepared to be bound by its consequences? Once again I'm not talking 'need', I'm talking 'should'.

Appreciably I only practice medicine in lil' ol' Australia rather than in big brave Blighty these days so I may not be well placed to comment; I daresay you think the latest COVID statistics in the UK as opposed to Australia's justifies an attitude of corner-cutting?

Think you're being a little harsh here. @Crewe has been clear on the distinction between legal and moral.

 

[Crewe]

What do you suggest is the point of taking the test at all then, if not prepared to be bound by its consequences? Once again I'm not talking 'need', I'm talking 'should'.

Appreciably I only practice medicine in lil' ol' Australia rather than in big brave Blighty these days so I may not be well placed to comment; I daresay you think the latest COVID statistics in the UK as opposed to Australia's justifies an attitude of corner-cutting?

I’m not justifying what he did. This is getting quite maddening now. I have criticised Beckles in more than one post.

 

[m]

Working on the assumption that Beckles did get COVID from within CAFC* it does highlight massive flaws in the protocol, whatever that may be.

There should have been clear and consitent guidance on all procedures with these permanently under review in light of failure. Specifically; no club should have had it's own protocol. Beckles was plainly right to have a test since he had the virus! If Crewe felt he didn't need a test then they were obviously wrong.

*this is still an assumption btw, whatever people may think

 

[Crewe]

So, Questions for ‘Crewe’, (both poster and club) do you have any idea who ‘blew the whistle’ from within the Crewe camp? Was it indeed a disgruntled person who felt the club had maybe been negligent by not getting everyone tested? Was there a general feeling that, if everyone kept quiet, then the 1st game would go ahead?

But when the team arrived at the Kashstad they discovered Oxford already knew......

Could that same ‘whistle blower’ not say what were the circumstances surrounding the second call off?

Also Asking for a friend.

I have no idea on the whistleblower score, I am afraid. What I do know is that Crewe were of the opinion they were following guidelines. You can piece it together a little bit with what Darragh Macanthony posted on twitter the other day. He said something along the lines of ‘what’s with all these late PPs? I thought if there was a positive test you isolate that player then carry on as normal?’ (That’s not word for word but it was roughly that and you can check his feed). So that is obviously the guidance from the EFL (whether PHE agree I have no idea).

So because Crewe isolated both Wintle and Beckles, they thought they were following guidelines in regards to game 1. And in fact, if that is exactly what happened, then they were following guidelines, hence the investigation from your local police force concluded there was no breach.

Now, that clearly shows that the guidelines are not fit for purpose in this particular case, and it shows a lack of common sense from Crewe. If you have 2 positives in 3 days, surely common sense dictates that there may be a problem here. And hindsight shows there was a problem with the subsequent positives of Dale and Wintle.

Edit** Dale and Finney

 

[Essexyellows]

A private test is different. You do not need to self isolate if you take a private test. That is just fact, contrary to what some other posters believe. I assume it’s so the millionaires and billionaires can get a test every day and carry on relatively normally. Bless them.

You must self isolate if you test positive doesn`t matter if that is private or otherwise.

Have a read of the law, that is law not guidance.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1045/pdfs/uksi_20201045_en.pdf

It is "common sense" to isolate whilst awaiting the result and informing your contacts and work colleagues, something Crewe appear to lack.

 

[Essexyellows]

I have no idea on the whistleblower score, I am afraid. What I do know is that Crewe were of the opinion they were following guidelines. You can piece it together a little bit with what Darragh Macanthony posted on twitter the other day. He said something along the lines of ‘what’s with all these late PPs? I thought if there was a positive test you isolate that player then carry on as normal?’ (That’s not word for word but it was roughly that and you can check his feed). So that is obviously the guidance from the EFL (whether PHE agree I have no idea).

So because Crewe isolated both Wintle and Beckles, they thought they were following guidelines in regards to game 1. And in fact, if that is exactly what happened, then they were following guidelines, hence the investigation from your local police force concluded there was no breach.

Now, that clearly shows that the guidelines are not fit for purpose in this particular case, and it shows a lack of common sense from Crewe. If you have 2 positives in 3 days, surely common sense dictates that there may be a problem here. And hindsight shows there was a problem with the subsequent positives of Dale and Wintle.

And rightly defined as an outbreak by PHE.
Maybe Crewe should step up, come clean and shut the doors for a couple of weeks.

 

[Crewe]

You must self isolate if you test positive doesn`t matter if that is private or otherwise.

Have a read of the law, that is law not guidance.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1045/pdfs/uksi_20201045_en.pdf

It is "common sense" to isolate whilst awaiting the result and informing your contacts and work colleagues, something Crewe appear to lack.

Of course I am aware that you must self isolate upon receiving a positive result of a private test. However, if you have no symptoms and you take a private test, then you don’t have to self isolate whilst awaiting your result. So in the Beckles scenario, I am referring to the (alleged) 3 day period between him taking the test and him getting his result.

 

[AbbeyOx]

if only there were some clear and definitive guidelines for this sort of thing ?

 

[ChamonixOx]

To end this debate - I’ll check with Boris for absolute clarity...........

 

[outsidethebox]

To end this debate - I’ll check with Boris for absolute clarity...........

You mean .... play football.....don't play football. Let's not even think about telling him that League 1 is actually Tier 3.

By the way, fair play to poster Crewe for sharing info and discussing on here. Shame on club Crewe / EFL / PHE for deciding not to release details and leave pretty much everything up for speculation. Maybe NM would like to comment on OUFCs view at todays 5 minute Radox forum.

 

[bazzer9461]

3rd new date for the game is 17th November so maybe now it may go ahead as it will give Crewe enough time to make sure their players are COVID free but then again the season maybe cancelled by then.

 

[Mike_H]

A private test is different. You do not need to self isolate if you take a private test. That is just fact, contrary to what some other posters believe. I assume it’s so the millionaires and billionaires can get a test every day and carry on relatively normally. Bless them.

I have looked for rules for private tests but I haven't been able to find anything. Do you have a link to these rules so we can see what the differences are? Thanks.

 

[bazzer9461]

I have looked for rules for private tests but I haven't been able to find anything. Do you have a link to these rules so we can see what the differences are? Thanks.

It should be the same if you test positive you have to isolate for 7 days and then tested again if negative your ok if positive you have to isolate again. What Beckles did by going private is no different than through the NHS or testing station, When tested he should of isolated, that’s gross misconduct.

 

[Mike_H]

You must self isolate if you test positive doesn`t matter if that is private or otherwise.

Have a read of the law, that is law not guidance.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1045/pdfs/uksi_20201045_en.pdf

It is "common sense" to isolate whilst awaiting the result and informing your contacts and work colleagues, something Crewe appear to lack.

Shouldn't you be criticising Beckles for this not Crewe?

It was Beckles who didn't isolate and inform his contacts. Crewe didn't know about the test until he told them he had tested positive.

Once Crewe knew about the test and the positive result he was sent home and didn't travel to the stadium.

Artell: "After Discussions With All Parties, The Right And Sensible Decision Was Made"

Artell says it was morally right to call the game off at Oxford after positive covid test.

www.crewealex.net

 

[Mike_H]

It should be the same if you test positive you have to isolate for 7 days and then tested again if negative your ok if positive you have to isolate again. What Beckles did by going private is no different than through the NHS or testing station, When tested he should of isolated, that’s gross misconduct.

I agree with you that the rules should be the same from the moment of taking the test, whether that be private or not. However others are saying that is not the case and that there are different rules for private tests. I can't find any evidence for this which is why I asked the question.

 

[Dilla]

Don't think Gillingham Crewe game will be off. Nice idea if it does happen or perhaps put the game on the Tuesday so we don't have a blank two weeks.

Sensible date to play the fixture as per my suggestion earlier.

New Crewe Date Arranged

Oxford United’s Sky Bet League 1 game at home to Crewe Alexandra will now take place on Tuesday November 17th with a 7pm kick off.

www.oufc.co.uk

 

[Crewe]

TBH I cannot find any official guidance on private testing. I am just going off what I have heard. Also, my brothers employer tests once a week and when they are in between results they don’t have to self isolate.

 

[bazzer9461]

Shouldn't you be criticising Beckles for this not Crewe?

It was Beckles who didn't isolate and inform his contacts. Crewe didn't know about the test until he told them he had tested positive.

Once Crewe knew about the test and the positive result he was sent home and didn't travel to the stadium.

Artell: "After Discussions With All Parties, The Right And Sensible Decision Was Made"

Artell says it was morally right to call the game off at Oxford after positive covid test.

www.crewealex.net

Beckles should be disciplined big
Time sackable offence at most companies

 

[bazzer9461]

I agree with you that the rules should be the same from the moment of taking the test, whether that be private or not. However others are saying that is not the case and that there are different rules for private tests. I can't find any evidence for this which is why I asked the question.

There isn’t any evidence they should apply to every test, it’s not a case of I’ve been tested at a testing station and now must isolate for seven days and your mate says I’ve just gone private I don’t have to.....very strange, there isn’t any difference just probably someone spouting BS