Jan 30: Canada vs US

[Obinna]

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/january-february-2022-wcq-window-vs-el-salvador-01-27-at-canada-01-30-vs-honduras-02-02.2118858/page-10

Speculation that McKennie is one of two American players who may be unavailable due to vaccination status.

This is truly a ridiculous reality we find ourselves in, with players not allowed to play alongside other players because they don't have a vaccine for the virus the other players are already vaccinated against, but putting that insanity aside I must say that he'd be the most significant loss for the Americans, considering their form. From a humanity standpoint I would be sad for him, but from a soccer standpoint I would be thrilled for them to be losing arguably their most in form player now. Certainly evens the odds since we've already lost our best player. 

Edited January 20, 2022 by Obinna
crossing text out to avoid confusion. was just saying I was sad for him to miss out because of his personal medical choice. I get others feel differently, but it's beside the point anyhow. the point is that mckennie could be out against us.

[Pottsy3]

2 minutes ago, Obinna said:

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/january-february-2022-wcq-window-vs-el-salvador-01-27-at-canada-01-30-vs-honduras-02-02.2118858/page-10

Speculation that McKennie is one of two American players who may be unavailable due to vaccination status.

This is truly a ridiculous reality we find ourselves in, with players not willing to just get fucking vaccinated. 

fixed it for you

[king1010]

6 minutes ago, Obinna said:

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/january-february-2022-wcq-window-vs-el-salvador-01-27-at-canada-01-30-vs-honduras-02-02.2118858/page-10

Speculation that McKennie is one of two American players who may be unavailable due to vaccination status.

This is truly a ridiculous reality we find ourselves in, with players not allowed to play alongside other players because they don't have a vaccine for the virus the other players are already vaccinated against, but putting that insanity aside I must say that he'd be the most significant loss for the Americans, considering their form. From a humanity standpoint I would be sad for him, but from a soccer standpoint I would be thrilled for them to be losing arguably their most in form player now. Certainly evens the odds since we've already lost our best player. 

not really ridiculous. countries have long had requirements to enter their borders

[Obinna]

1 minute ago, Pottsy3 said:

fixed it for you

Okay great. Well profanity or not, the significant thing here is that McKennie may be out, which would be huge for us. If you go to that link, the tweet in question is from October so this may not exactly be up to date, but if the American fans are suspecting they could be losing McKennie based on that tweet, we should take note of it as well. 

[Obinna]

3 minutes ago, king1010 said:

not really ridiculous. countries have long had requirements to enter their borders

Okay, well despite our differing opinions on the degree to which the current border requirements are insane, the key talking point here is the possibility that McKennie is out against us, again. 

Another player is partially vaccinated, but there's no indication of who that may be, and presumably that person completed their "vaccine schedule", but there's a chance they never, so there's a possibility there could be up to 2 players out for the USA.

[Ngravs]

2 hours ago, The Real Marc said:

Not one provincial decision-maker is thinking about COVID restrictions in the context of this game.  They'll set the rules, and the game will follow. I get we're all soccer fans here but some of the takes are hopelessly sweet.

You don’t think the CSA has leverage with the 2026 World Cup? Obviously being optimistic but the fact that they haven’t announced something that was so obvious (50% fans or less) leaves me to believe they are in serious discussion for full cap. Hopeless sweet take was a bit of a reach. 

[theaub]

4 minutes ago, Ngravs said:

You don’t think the CSA has leverage with the 2026 World Cup? Obviously being optimistic but the fact that they haven’t announced something that was so obvious (50% fans or less) leaves me to believe they are in serious discussion for full cap. Hopeless sweet take was a bit of a reach. 

Hamilton isn't a WC city so they don't care.

[Califax]

 

Im catching up with this thread after doing actual work for a bit.

 

 

[Ngravs]

6 minutes ago, theaub said:

Hamilton isn't a WC city so they don't care.

Referring to the provincial decision-maker comment. 

Edited January 20, 2022 by Ngravs

[The Real Marc]

11 minutes ago, Ngravs said:

You don’t think the CSA has leverage with the 2026 World Cup? Obviously being optimistic but the fact that they haven’t announced something that was so obvious (50% fans or less) leaves me to believe they are in serious discussion for full cap. Hopeless sweet take was a bit of a reach. 

Nope. The CSA is not going to influence the setting of provincial rules on COVID. I'm sure the CSA is discussing the capacity with public health authorities, but it will be within those rules - not determining or influencing them. There are myriad bigger sectors, activities, stakeholders the government would want to take into account in advance of twisting rules to accomodate a one-off soccer game.

The idea that some have expressed in the past pages, that provincial decision-makers were making COVID restriction rules with a mind to accomodate the game was truthfully over-exuberant fandom - heart-warming, but fanciful.

For us, this is huge. For everyone else, it's just a sports game. If we get 50% capacity or more it's a huge win.

Edited January 20, 2022 by The Real Marc

[JamboAl]

9 minutes ago, Ngravs said:

Referring to the provincial decision-maker comment. 

@theaub’s comment stands.  This game has little importance from everyone’s point of view, except for the soccer loving community.

[Ngravs]

7 minutes ago, The Real Marc said:

Nope. The CSA is not going to influence the setting of provincial rules on COVID. I'm sure the CSA is discussing the capacity with public health authorities, but it will be within those rules - not determining or influencing them. There are myriad bigger sectors, activities, stakeholders the government would want to take into account in advance of twisting rules to accomodate a one-off soccer game.

The idea that some have expressed in the past pages, that provincial decision-makers were making COVID restriction rules with a mind to accomodate the game was truthfully over-exuberant fandom - heart-warming, but fanciful.

For us, this is huge. For everyone else, it's just a sports game. If we get 50% capacity or more it's a huge win.

I don't think the CSA is influencing anything related to overall Covid measures. We're talking about an outdoor event as opposed to indoor event rules discussed in the press conference. I don't see these measures being compared to anything of the sort right now (no other outdoor events going on). This was done for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers in the summer where Manitoba had strict rules for any indoor events with full capacity outdoor sports (for fully vaxxed individuals). I'm well aware Omnicron is a different strain but again my point is that I don't think it's that far-fetched that there are serious discussions going on about full capacity being an option. 

[apbsmith]

4 hours ago, Obinna said:

Canada Soccer tells media members they're still working with Public Health partners for a "media relations plan".....

This clown show makes me want to bang my head against the wall... and I am not even planning to go.

I feel very sorry for those who actually need to follow this circus to find out if they are allowed to attend.

Welcome to Ontario the last 2 years lol. 

[Bison44]

1 minute ago, Ngravs said:

I don't think the CSA is influencing anything related to overall Covid measures. We're talking about an outdoor event as opposed to indoor event rules discussed in the press conference. I don't see these measures being compared to anything of the sort right now (no other outdoor events going on). This was done for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers in the summer where Manitoba had strict rules for any indoor events with full capacity outdoor sports (for fully vaxxed individuals). I'm well aware Omnicron is a different strain but again my point is that I don't think it's that far-fetched that there are serious discussions going on about full capacity being an option. 

And that was a shitstorm.  Pallister got raked over the coals and non sports fans complained endlessly.   And that wasnt for a one off thing but an important community owned institution.  These Gov cant win and they have to balance everything and all the different interest groups.  

[Ngravs]

5 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

And that was a shitstorm.  Pallister got raked over the coals and non sports fans complained endlessly.   And that wasnt for a one off thing but an important community owned institution.  These Gov cant win and they have to balance everything and all the different interest groups.  

I wouldn't say that was a shitstorm. Pallister was getting shit on for whatever he said even having strict restrictions for a conservative gov. I think the whole thing was quite a success in hindsight. The Government can't win anyways so I don't see it as being that big of an issue. That being said, I know nothing of the Hamilton leaders, I'm basing my argument on the provincial gov. 

[jonovision]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

This public health decision is about optics, plain and simple. Outdoor events like this do not pose a creditable risk to the health of the general public at large. There is no scientific analysis that informs the decision making in this case.

I think you overstate the case. The likelihood of COVID transmission occurring at a sold-out THF would be much higher than some other activities that are currently be restricted. Outdoor transmission is much less common than indoor, but hardly impossible. People sharing bathrooms, concourses, transit to the match, etc. will spread the virus. That's the science (though it's mostly math). Given the same percentage of infected people attending, you'd expect more transmissions from the national team match at 100% than 500 people at a Raptors game, for example.

Whether that is acceptable risk is, unfortunately, not up to us to decide.

Edited January 20, 2022 by jonovision

[DrunkOffPunch]

57 minutes ago, Obinna said:

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/january-february-2022-wcq-window-vs-el-salvador-01-27-at-canada-01-30-vs-honduras-02-02.2118858/page-10

Speculation that McKennie is one of two American players who may be unavailable due to vaccination status.

This is truly a ridiculous reality we find ourselves in, with players not allowed to play alongside other players because they don't have a vaccine for the virus the other players are already vaccinated against, but putting that insanity aside I must say that he'd be the most significant loss for the Americans, considering their form. From a humanity standpoint I would be sad for him, but from a soccer standpoint I would be thrilled for them to be losing arguably their most in form player now. Certainly evens the odds since we've already lost our best player. 

McKennie was out with an injury. Going into Panama only 1 player hadn’t had both shots. Most assume it was Antonee Robinson beings he previously had a heart condition. I’d assume he’s gotten his second shot since then.

[frattinator]

Edit: Removed. While the original post's intention was to offer evidence in support of @king1010 post, it's off topic and I don't want to be accused of hijacking posts again. I'll just say that it's incredibly difficult to only keep COVID conversations in the COVID thread when it gets brought up again and again in other threads, and since I can't control my emotions and respond when I see things that are not exactly correct, I'll just refrain from positing all together (I think I was doing a pretty good job until just now). 

✌️

Edited January 20, 2022 by frattinator
edit for grammar

[Obinna]

3 minutes ago, jonovision said:

I think you overstate the case. The likelihood of COVID transmission occurring at a sold-out THF would be much higher than some other activities that are currently be restricted. Outdoor transmission is much less common than indoor, but hardly impossible. People sharing bathrooms, concourses, transit to the match, etc. will be spread the virus. That's the science (though it's mostly math). Whether that is acceptable risk is, unfortunately, not up to us to decide.

I didn't say it was impossible. I certainly wouldn't recommend you go to THF if you're immunocompromised. I wouldn't recommend eating at THF with unwashed hands. I wouldn't recommend getting into someone else's personal space. There is obvious risk with that many people. I was certainly cognizant of the risks when I went to Commonwealth. 

I am saying there is no scientific or even mathematical reason not to proceed with full capacity for an outdoor event like this.

This is very much a "go at your own risk" proposition, nothing more. 

Even at 100% capacity this won't be a super-spreader event that'll take down the Hamilton medical system. 

[Daniel]

So, uh, when will we know what's going on with our tickets???

[narduch]

1 minute ago, Daniel said:

So, uh, when will we know what's going on with our tickets???

By the 24th according to Kloke.

[Obinna]

8 minutes ago, frattinator said:

Case in point #1: 

Case in point #2: 

Case in point #3: 

"A southbound passenger train halted in southern Quebec near the Vermont border, where an elderly, bespectacled man boarded the train. This man, a physician named Dr. Hamilton, worked his way down the aisles, asking each passenger, “Been vaccinated?” Unless they had documentation proving that they had been, Hamilton asked them to display their arms, where he looked for a “fresh scar” indicating a recent inoculation. If he could find no scar, a local paper informed readers, he either vaccinated the passenger on the spot or asked them to leave the train before it entered the United States.

The year was 1885. U.S. border officials in the late 19th century did not expect travelers to carry the identification documents that international transit requires today—but they did often require passengers to provide evidence that they had been vaccinated from smallpox. Whether at ports of entry including New York’s Ellis Island and San Francisco’s Angel Island, or along the U.S. border with Canada or Mexico, officials expected border-crossers to prove their immunity. As an El Paso newspaper put it in 1910, travelers needed to show one of three things: “A vaccination certificate, a properly scarred arm, or a pitted face” indicating that they had survived smallpox." 

https://time.com/5952532/vaccine-passport-history/

Edit: People treat vaccination requirements for international travel as some sort of a new restriction due to COVID on your personal liberty, when it's been around in one form or another for the past 150 years. Smallpox vaccine requirements for international travel also was widespread until we finally irradicated smallpox. Even the League of Nations in the 1930s-1940s stepped in to try to create an international standard to help nations track travelers of their vaccination status (smallpox, cholera, yellow fever etc.). 

@admin @JamboAl

Mods, please consider moving the quoted post to the appropriate thread. Thanks.

By the way, nowhere did I say all forms of vaccine requirement are ridiculous across the board. If you have a personal vendetta against those who do, take it up with them and take it up somewhere else, please. Nobody is saying that here.  

[Admin]

Take the vaccine talk to the Covid thread.

 

[Approve My Account Pls]

50% confirmed. All tickets cancelled, new sale date on Jan 26 with presale (Vs?) on the 25th

 

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by Approve My Account Pls

[Ngravs]

I was so excited when I got my tickets in the spot I wanted