How much will Coronavirus (COVID-19) impact Aston Villa's season?

[paul_e]

Yet Boris is being far more cautious about ending the lockdown than many on all sides would like.  He's also coming under pressure from Starmer to do so.  But this doesn't feed into the leftish narrative.  But yeah, if the PL comes back it will all be down to Boris and his agenda to fuck over the masses.

The bold bit just isn't true, Starmer is pressing for him to make public the mechanism by which the lockdown can be ended and the longer term plans that will be in place to ensure we limit the risk of a 2nd wave. Again though, this is just a chance for you to slag off the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you by acting like you understand their views better than they do.

No it's not Paul.  Are you trying to understand my views better than I do?

You going to provide any evidence to back yourself up or just sulk again like usual?

Evidence of what?  That Bo brought up the Tories pushing for an end to lockdown and those at the top will have there way the rest of us are just cannon fodder in a discussion about the PL deciding whether to finish the season or not?  Or that Stamer is trying to build a narrative that the Government were slow to lockdown, slow with PPE, slow to test and is laying the groundwork for him to be able to say they were slow to ease the lockdown if it suits his case to do so at a later date?

The evidence of ther former is on the page before and the latter just seems like pretty a transparent strategy that I don't feel the need to provide evidence for.

I'm not a particulaly political person but it just irritates me when people bring it up in the way Bo did.  I have not intention in getting in a debate with you about it, if I wanted to waste my life that way I'd spend more time in off topic letting you educate me about how much you know about everything.

No, I don't think I know lots about everything, just more than you and I don't have to resort to claiming the moral high ground in every discussion so I don't have to answer to hide my lack of basic knowledge. ou do need to provide evidence though because otherwise it's a baseless opinion being presented as an obvious fact, something you've done regularly on this thread.

[brentastonb6]

Every day I check this thread in the hope that one of our informed number will have some great factual news to share to bring this whole episode to a close. See you again same time tomorrow  🤞

[PeterWithesShin]

This thread is high on irony.

[chrisw1]

Yet Boris is being far more cautious about ending the lockdown than many on all sides would like.  He's also coming under pressure from Starmer to do so.  But this doesn't feed into the leftish narrative.  But yeah, if the PL comes back it will all be down to Boris and his agenda to fuck over the masses.

The bold bit just isn't true, Starmer is pressing for him to make public the mechanism by which the lockdown can be ended and the longer term plans that will be in place to ensure we limit the risk of a 2nd wave. Again though, this is just a chance for you to slag off the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you by acting like you understand their views better than they do.

No it's not Paul.  Are you trying to understand my views better than I do?

You going to provide any evidence to back yourself up or just sulk again like usual?

Evidence of what?  That Bo brought up the Tories pushing for an end to lockdown and those at the top will have there way the rest of us are just cannon fodder in a discussion about the PL deciding whether to finish the season or not?  Or that Stamer is trying to build a narrative that the Government were slow to lockdown, slow with PPE, slow to test and is laying the groundwork for him to be able to say they were slow to ease the lockdown if it suits his case to do so at a later date?

The evidence of ther former is on the page before and the latter just seems like pretty a transparent strategy that I don't feel the need to provide evidence for.

I'm not a particulaly political person but it just irritates me when people bring it up in the way Bo did.  I have not intention in getting in a debate with you about it, if I wanted to waste my life that way I'd spend more time in off topic letting you educate me about how much you know about everything.

No, I don't think I know lots about everything, just more than you and I don't have to resort to claiming the moral high ground in every discussion so I don't have to answer to hide my lack of basic knowledge. ou do need to provide evidence though because otherwise it's a baseless opinion being presented as an obvious fact, something you've done regularly on this thread.

You are so arrogant and condecending that it beggars belief.  The forum is littered with your superiority and your lack of self awareness is staggering.  This is why I try not get into discourse with you. 

[Sexual Ealing]

He said, pompously.

[chrisw1]

He said, pompously.

If I said it how I wanted to I'd be banned.

[paul_e]

You are so arrogant and condecending that it beggars belief.  The forum is littered with your superiority and your lack of self awareness is staggering.  This is why I try not get into discourse with you. 

It was intended to be arrogant and condescending (you really should spell check by the way) because I knew you wouldn't actually answer. Again, rather than sulking how about you explain why you think Starmer is planning to say the government were too slow to lift the lockdown. Whilst you're at it you can also explain how safety concerns of restarting football too soon is both a valid viewpoint but also not, but only if you're a Villa fan and can be accused of wanting to void the season to avoid relegation.

[Sexual Ealing]

He said, pompously.

If I said it how I wanted to I'd be banned.

You're stating false information and then going in a huff when that's pointed out to you.

[Abbeyfealeavfc]

The football authorities didn't think much of govt guidelines at the outset when they cancelled matches the weekend of 14th/15th March because of the dither and delay of said govt.
Now they are awaiting govt guidelines before deciding what to do next. They are selective when they want to be or are they conveniently waiting for something to hide behind when the inevitable sh-t hits the fan and money is involved?

[chrisw1]

I've already explained everything you've asked above.  I believe Starmer is laying the groundwork and yes it's an opinion.  There would be very few posts on this forum if every one had to be backed by hard evidence.

I've never said safety concerns aren't a valid reason not to restart football, I've only ever said it's reasonable for the PL to look into the options.  And yes, I've questioned whether Villa's particular predicament has influenced some posters views on whether the season should be scrapped or not.  I don't think this is such a stretch given that some acknowledge it and in the same way I have no doubt it is influencing views being expressed on Liverpool, Leeds and West Brom forums. 

[chrisw1]

He said, pompously.

If I said it how I wanted to I'd be banned.

You're stating false information and then going in a huff when that's pointed out to you.

Unlike you to get involved, but go on then what false information have I posted?  I'm guessing the pressure from Starmer bit?  If so then fine, you may see it differently.  I've explained how I see it.  It wasn't a dig at Starmer, I like him and have thought he should be Labour leader for some time now.  It was just a point on my general comment about Bo blaming everything on the Tories, which I didn't think was necessary or relevant.  The decision first and foremost comes from the PL and the clubs - it is they who should bear any criticism in the first instance.  When that decision is made the Government may or may not allow it - a decision I expect will be made on the basis of scientific advice, not some nefarious desire to make the rich richer and use the masses as cannon fodder.   

[paul_e]

I've already explained everything you've asked above.  I believe Starmer is laying the groundwork and yes it's an opinion.  There would be very few posts on this forum if every one had to be backed by hard evidence.

I've never said safety concerns aren't a valid reason not to restart football, I've only ever said it's reasonable for the PL to look into the options.  And yes, I've questioned whether Villa's particular predicament has influenced some posters views on whether the season should be scrapped or not.  I don't think this is such a stretch given that some acknowledge it and in the same way I have no doubt it is influencing views being expressed on Liverpool, Leeds and West Brom forums. 

So you don't see any difference between:

I believe Starmer is laying the groundwork and yes it's an opinion

and

He's also coming under pressure from Starmer to do so

The latter isn't presented as an opinion and it certainly isn't presented as something that you think may happen in the future.

This is exactly the same trick you pulled with the bias thing, it may be true that people are looking at things from a different perspective but that's the same as accusing people of ignoring legitimate solutions because they don't think they work out as well as others. I highly doubt there's anyone on here that wouldn't love for the virus to have cleared up in a couple of weeks and to be back watching games so the season could finish properly.

This is where you've got things backwards, any rule changes that need to happen to allow the season to finish are either good, bad or neutral for all the teams, there's nothing wrong with clubs or fans not liking the bad options and that shouldn't need to be acknowledged.

[chrisw1]

Noted.  I'll expect you to put 'in my opinion' or provide hard evidence on everything you post from now on.

An opinion isn't a trick, it's an opinion.  The forum is full of them, it's kind of the point.

Cheers, it's been fun.

[David_Nab]

According to David Ornstein from The Athetic we are one of the clubs who have agreed to the neutral venue option , the other teams near us all object ( Norwich not made view known)

[chrisw1]

According to David Ornstein from The Athetic we are one of the clubs who have agreed to the neutral venue option , the other teams near us all object ( Norwich not made view known)

I'd love to know the thinking behind this.  Maybe a worry regading a points per game outcome?