General Stoppages to attend to fans

[dickwalton1964]

Why are we now seeing so many games stopped while medics attend to supposedly stricken fans ? Now I'm not belittling the seriousness of a fan having a heart attack or something equally as concerning but most of these fans seem to 'recover' and the game soon re-starts. I've seen about five incidents now in the past few months - that's just from watching live TV games - for something that was unheard of 30 or 40 years ago when fans were packed in like sardines in all temperatures. Now they are sat comfortably with ample space they seem to be dropping like flies. It's probably indicative of the society we are in that even a fan experiencing a bit of giddiness or a flush is probably going to call for help and stop the game.

Could we be going down the route where fans, as well as players, are going to play for time and have an impact in stemming the flow of a game if their team is under the cosh. You can just imagine the scenario - 10 minutes to go your team defending like mad as the opposition, full of momentum, come forward in wave after wave in search of a precious goal and then one of the fans goes down 'ill', kills the oppositions flow and buys his or hers team a valuable pep talk on the sidelines.

It's bizarre, I've never known anything like it and haven't heard any reports of a fatality or even one of these suffering a serious medical problem.

 

[holdsteady]

They never used to stop games previously so you wouldn’t of known of incidents just from watching on tv, I remember a fan dying near us at Crystal Palace away in the nineties and the game carried on.

The average age of football fans has gone up though so I suppose it could be happening a bit more frequently.

 

[Oxford57]

A Fulham fan died during a game I believe ,

 

[unification]

I don't subscribe to The Athletic nor can I put up with the advert barrage from The Independent but there is some reading here if you can get to it.

How football has changed its outlook on crowd emergencies

Medical emergencies are nothing new at football - the only marked difference is that games are now being consistently halted

theathletic.com

Debunking the myth around rise in medical emergencies at football matches

Fulham supporter Paul Parish suffered a cardiac arrest at Craven Cottage on Saturday and later died, with numerous other incidents of medical emergencies halting games across the country this season

www.independent.co.uk

If anyone is willing or able to get the gist of either of those, it would be interesting to note.

At a guess, I figure that whether a stoppage takes place depends on the emergency. Someone having a 'funny turn' may simply go to a steward and ask to be taken somewhere quiet until they feel better. Something more serious - such as a cardiac arrest - may need to utilise more space to remove a fan from the scene including taking them around the pitch depending on the stadium layout. It would be distracting and liable to make a situation more dangerous if a game was going on still.

 

[Concretebob]

They never used to stop games previously so you wouldn’t of known of incidents just from watching on tv, I remember a fan dying near us at Crystal Palace away in the nineties and the game carried on.

The average age of football fans has gone up though so I suppose it could be happening a bit more frequently.

I remember a home game v Hull in the 90s where someone had a heart attack in the Osler Road terrace and the game carried on whilst the person in question was treated.

I believe people are just more medically aware.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I suspect it's also to do with the improvement of medical facilities and personnel at football grounds and an understanding that speed can be of the essence. In the old days, a geezer coming into the stands and giving you a wipe with a wet sponge probably wouldn't have done anyone much good anyway - very different now. It IS slightly annoying when games are halted, but it's certainly worth it. Whether fans might fake injury or illness to slow the game down is an interesting question - if so, maybe they are just learning from what they have seen on the pitch!

 

[Oxymoron]

I read through the Independent article, nothing earth shattering, just the journalists recollection and experience of watching football for 50+ years. It can probably be summed up from this cut n paste

The big difference now is that priorities have changed. The health of those who have fallen ill has become the priority over the continuation of the action. There is nothing new here but a change of attitude. Far from it foreshadowing doom, it is a positive development. First responders say that a break in play reduces the risk to the patient. It calms the crowd, it makes it easier for medics to move around because they are not blocking views and it allows them to focus and communicate without being distracted by shouting and chanting. Plus, it means club doctors can get involved if needed.

Halting play has nothing to do with pandemics or vaccines. It’s about human decency. Anyone who tries to tell you differently puts conspiracy over compassion.

To illustrate the point, he recalls being at a Merseyside derby in the 80's when Everton club legend "Dixie" Dean suffered a heart attack whilst watching the game and died. No stoppages, just a rumour that swept the ground that it had happened.

 

[Berliner]

I suppose the question is, are people increasingly surviving medical emergencies now with the game interrupted in contrast to those previously dying when the game continued.

If this is the case, then there's really no grounds for complaint.

 

[Marked Ox]

suppose the question is, are people increasingly surviving medical emergencies now with the game interrupted in contrast to those previously dying when the game continued.

If this is the case, then there's really no grounds for complaint.

Stopping the game makes it easier for medical staff and their response as people get out of their way, they don't have to shout over chanting so communication is easier and the club doctors/physios can get involved. The Independent suggested this iirc, but what that is based on I don't know.

Seems a no brainer to me, at least even in terms of human decency.

 

[dickwalton1964]

I don't subscribe to The Athletic nor can I put up with the advert barrage from The Independent but there is some reading here if you can get to it.

How football has changed its outlook on crowd emergencies

Medical emergencies are nothing new at football - the only marked difference is that games are now being consistently halted

theathletic.com

Debunking the myth around rise in medical emergencies at football matches

Fulham supporter Paul Parish suffered a cardiac arrest at Craven Cottage on Saturday and later died, with numerous other incidents of medical emergencies halting games across the country this season

www.independent.co.uk

If anyone is willing or able to get the gist of either of those, it would be interesting to note.

At a guess, I figure that whether a stoppage takes place depends on the emergency. Someone having a 'funny turn' may simply go to a steward and ask to be taken somewhere quiet until they feel better. Something more serious - such as a cardiac arrest - may need to utilise more space to remove a fan from the scene including taking them around the pitch depending on the stadium layout. It would be distracting and liable to make a situation more dangerous if a game was going on still.

I wonder if they'd halt a grand prix to tend to a poorly fan ? I'm sort of doubtful even a test match would be stopped.

 

[MarkG]

Maybe food like this !

 

[werthersoriginal]

Why are we now seeing so many games stopped while medics attend to supposedly stricken fans ? Now I'm not belittling the seriousness of a fan having a heart attack or something equally as concerning but most of these fans seem to 'recover' and the game soon re-starts. I've seen about five incidents now in the past few months - that's just from watching live TV games - for something that was unheard of 30 or 40 years ago when fans were packed in like sardines in all temperatures. Now they are sat comfortably with ample space they seem to be dropping like flies. It's probably indicative of the society we are in that even a fan experiencing a bit of giddiness or a flush is probably going to call for help and stop the game.

Could we be going down the route where fans, as well as players, are going to play for time and have an impact in stemming the flow of a game if their team is under the cosh. You can just imagine the scenario - 10 minutes to go your team defending like mad as the opposition, full of momentum, come forward in wave after wave in search of a precious goal and then one of the fans goes down 'ill', kills the oppositions flow and buys his or hers team a valuable pep talk on the sidelines.

It's bizarre, I've never known anything like it and haven't heard any reports of a fatality or even one of these suffering a serious medical problem.

Yes even old people are snowflakes these days, they make a terrible fuss over heart attacks.

 

[holdsteady]

I wonder if they'd halt a grand prix to tend to a poorly fan ? I'm sort of doubtful even a test match would be stopped.

One of those sports you are miles from the action and the other is a slow game with a lot of natural breaks. Not really comparable.

 

[dickwalton1964]

Yes even old people are snowflakes these days, they make a terrible fuss over heart attacks.

Apparently of all the stoppages lately there hasn’t been one fatality, one heart attack or one life threatening condition. That’s obviously very good news but sort of backs up the view that games are being stopped a bit too easily. Games will soon be regularly going past 5pm if this present trend continues - and whether you like it or not it is exactly that, a trend. The general population hasn’t suddenly become so poorly.

Do you think they’d halt a Grand Prix if someone fell ill in the crowd ? I don’t think they’d even stop the racing if someone was being attended to or even taken out on a stretcher. Same with somewhere like Glastonbury, I can’t imagine anything stopping that.

As I say, anything genuinely threatening like a heart attack of course is worthy of stopping the action but anything else, like a bit of dizziness, no just carry on. It seems football takes the brunt of, and panders to, a lot of societal issues.

 

[dickwalton1964]

One of those sports you are miles from the action and the other is a slow game with a lot of natural breaks. Not really comparable.

What’s the distance from the action got to do with someone teetering on death in the crowd ? How about a respect issue as much as anything ?

 

[Marked Ox]

Apparently of all the stoppages lately there hasn’t been one fatality, one heart attack or one life threatening condition. That’s obviously very good news but sort of backs up the view that games are being stopped a bit too easily. Games will soon be regularly going past 5pm if this present trend continues - and whether you like it or not it is exactly that, a trend. The general population hasn’t suddenly become so poorly.

Do you think they’d halt a Grand Prix if someone fell ill in the crowd ? I don’t think they’d even stop the racing if someone was being attended to or even taken out on a stretcher. Same with somewhere like Glastonbury, I can’t imagine anything stopping that.

As I say, anything genuinely threatening like a heart attack of course is worthy of stopping the action but anything else, like a bit of dizziness, no just carry on. It seems football takes the brunt of, and panders to, a lot of societal issues.

Eh?

Paul Parish died at the Fulham/Blackpool game in late January of a Cardiac arrest. And until somebody is treated, they won't know what the cause is.

Fulham fan dies after Blackpool game

A Fulham supporter has died after suffering a cardiac arrest which led to the game against Blackpool being stopped for more than 40 minutes.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[dickwalton1964]

Eh?

Paul Parish died at the Fulham/Blackpool game in late January of a Cardiac arrest. And until somebody is treated, they won't know what the cause is.

Fulham fan dies after Blackpool game

A Fulham supporter has died after suffering a cardiac arrest which led to the game against Blackpool being stopped for more than 40 minutes.

www.bbc.co.uk

There’s been about 20 odd stoppages since then.

 

[unification]

Apparently of all the stoppages lately there hasn’t been one fatality, one heart attack or one life threatening condition. That’s obviously very good news but sort of backs up the view that games are being stopped a bit too easily. Games will soon be regularly going past 5pm if this present trend continues - and whether you like it or not it is exactly that, a trend. The general population hasn’t suddenly become so poorly.

Do you think they’d halt a Grand Prix if someone fell ill in the crowd ? I don’t think they’d even stop the racing if someone was being attended to or even taken out on a stretcher. Same with somewhere like Glastonbury, I can’t imagine anything stopping that.

As I say, anything genuinely threatening like a heart attack of course is worthy of stopping the action but anything else, like a bit of dizziness, no just carry on. It seems football takes the brunt of, and panders to, a lot of societal issues.

It’s a strange line in the sand that you’re drawing here.

Perhaps because games have been stopped, then someone’s life has been saved?

I would also hazard a guess that people have fallen ill at games recently and the game hasn’t stopped as well. I’ve seen that myself when someone was struck by an errant shot and a steward guided them away for treatment elsewhere. The game carried on. Not every single ill person is going to equate to a stoppage of play.

As The Independent story says above, stoppages allow for club doctors to get involved, for fans to move aside and not get antsy about missing the game, to allow for a moment of quiet for medical staff to do what they need to do. I don’t see the parallels with Formula 1 or cricket - different sports, watched in different ways with different moments of calm and excitement (I’d argue there’s no excitement in watching cars go around in circles but that’s just me).

If it saves a life, what’s the harm in it?

 

[Marked Ox]

There’s been about 20 odd stoppages since then.

It is still recent. And until the person receives a rough diagnosis then the seriousness of any situation isn't known, hence the stoppage.

 

[dickwalton1964]

It’s a strange line in the sand that you’re drawing here.

Perhaps because games have been stopped, then someone’s life has been saved?

I would also hazard a guess that people have fallen ill at games recently and the game hasn’t stopped as well. I’ve seen that myself when someone was struck by an errant shot and a steward guided them away for treatment elsewhere. The game carried on. Not every single ill person is going to equate to a stoppage of play.

As The Independent story says above, stoppages allow for club doctors to get involved, for fans to move aside and not get antsy about missing the game, to allow for a moment of quiet for medical staff to do what they need to do. I don’t see the parallels with Formula 1 or cricket - different sports, watched in different ways with different moments of calm and excitement (I’d argue there’s no excitement in watching cars go around in circles but that’s just me).

If it saves a life, what’s the harm in it?

Im not quite getting the reaction to crowd incidents in different sports. Surely a dying spectator is a dying spectator, irrespective of what the action is they’re watching. it strikes me it wouldn’t halt a Grand Prix because it’s not as easy to restart as a football match and this just trivialises the seriousness of the person who’s fallen ill.