Jump to content

Crowd test events


piffer

Recommended Posts

Talk this morning of the first test event being at Murrayfield for the Edinburgh vs Glasgow game. Size of crowd around 1000.

I can’t wait to get supporters back in to stadiums but see absolutely no point in that. It’s the biggest stadium in the country and that’s a pitiful number.

Obviously football is in the bad books but start with a crowd of that size at Rugby Park, Fir Park, Easter Road, McDiarmid Park. Then gradually increase it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, piffer said:

Talk this morning of the first test event being at Murrayfield for the Edinburgh vs Glasgow game. Size of crowd around 1000.

I can’t wait to get supporters back in to stadiums but see absolutely no point in that. It’s the biggest stadium in the country and that’s a pitiful number.

Obviously football is in the bad books but start with a crowd of that size at Rugby Park, Fir Park, Easter Road, McDiarmid Park. Then gradually increase it. 

agreed.  If they're using Merryfield the crows shouldve been designed to allow 2m soci distancing in the seating areas.  Thay would give a truer reflection on the worst case scenario for toilets, food stalls, exit and egress,  etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point of this exercise is to see how the crowd enter , exit and move around to snack bars etc ( if they’re even allowed to do so ) In such a large stadium they can monitor this smaller number easier and perhaps learn lessons for the future .

They can also “trust “ the egg chaser fans  to behave more ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, piffer said:

Talk this morning of the first test event being at Murrayfield for the Edinburgh vs Glasgow game. Size of crowd around 1000.

I can’t wait to get supporters back in to stadiums but see absolutely no point in that. It’s the biggest stadium in the country and that’s a pitiful number.

Obviously football is in the bad books but start with a crowd of that size at Rugby Park, Fir Park, Easter Road, McDiarmid Park. Then gradually increase it. 

They're probably more likely to test 1000 in a block, or in one stand, than in the whole stadium in a test event.  Or have 2 blocks occupied with different social distancing setup, see if there's any differences in any infections reported after, or more likely see how the crowd flows in the stadium with different setups.

All the computer models the usually use for crowd flow, won't account for social distancing, so they'll need 'real' data, they'll be more cameras on the crowd, than facing the pitch..  Is probably 'most safe' testing that in Murrayfield at about 2% capacity - could be a long way from any real events involving fans IMO.

Edited by RAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scouser2 said:

Is probably just used as a starting point , to learn lessons from and then step up crowd sizes at next test event ......

Interesting that crowds are going to be allowed at lower level non league games down south from September 

The level that are opening up in England are in the main social clubs with an attached football pitch. They are financed by the bar takings and the kids clubs. At any given game it is at best 60% watching the game and the rest in the bar. No more people than you will see in a large supermarket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Numbers on a par with, or less than, a large supermarket, for sure. 

But suggesting that they are glorified social clubs with almost half the people in the bar is harsh, in my experience. 

Dedicated people struggle to keep these clubs going because they love football and attendances are probably similar to most Scottish Leagues One and Two clubs. 

It’s an ideal level to readmit spectators at - the clubs can sure use the income!  

 

Edited by skygod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Richaway said:

Only on killiefc.com could you get red cards for wanting to go to watch your team.

what are we waiting for as viruses aren’t going away. 

You make it sound too simple, and wanting to see your team is nothing of the sorts as to why you're getting the red cards. There'll be plenty with the same attitude on other team's forums and they'll be getting met with the same response. I suspect you know that and are being deliberately facetious. 

"let those who want to attend go" translates to "Let those who wants to attend go, and let everyone else suffer the consequences". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dieter's Heeder said:

You make it sound too simple, and wanting to see your team is nothing of the sorts as to why you're getting the red cards. There'll be plenty with the same attitude on other team's forums and they'll be getting met with the same response. I suspect you know that and are being deliberately facetious. 

"let those who want to attend go" translates to "Let those who wants to attend go, and let everyone else suffer the consequences". 

Nope my point is let those that want to attend go. Those that don’t can watch it on tv.

my other point is what are we waiting for? This might still be about in years to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Richaway said:

Nope my point is let those that want to attend go. Those that don’t can watch it on tv.

my other point is what are we waiting for? This might still be about in years to come.

But your first point really doesn't take into account any unintended consequences. Those who are mingling in the surroundings of several thousand people returning home to vulnerable family members or spreading it through shops, schools and the wider community. 

If it was as simple as being a risk only for those who wanted to take it, the gates would be open by now. It's fine to risk your health and life but your approach is risking everyone else's, including those who chose not to go. 

Edited by Dieter's Heeder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, skygod said:

Numbers on a par with, or less than, a large supermarket, for sure. 

But suggesting that they are glorified social clubs with almost half the people in the bar is harsh, in my experience. 

Dedicated people struggle to keep these clubs going because they love football and attendances are probably similar to most Scottish Leagues One and Two clubs. 

It’s an ideal level to readmit spectators at - the clubs can sure use the income!  

 

My point was the clubs in England are not opening up to test crowd control. I was making the comparison that in many cases they are no different to large pubs. 

I totally agree they are usually run by people who love football and want to their local community. They are important community hubs and it was ludicrous that they remained closed while their local Wetherspoons was allowed to open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dieter's Heeder said:

But your first point really doesn't take into account any unintended consequences. Those who are mingling in the surroundings of several thousand people returning home to vulnerable family members or spreading it through shops, schools and the wider community. 

If it was as simple as being a risk only for those who wanted to take it, the gates would be open by now. It's fine to risk your health and life but your approach is risking everyone else's, including those who chose not to go. 

Exactly.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...