# DA travel games at risk due to coronavirus?



## Husky13 (Mar 10, 2020)

Is anyone hearing any rumblings about this?  So far, it seems like things are moving ahead (with precautions being taken), but I suspect this is only a matter of time.  I fully appreciate that youth soccer games are not as mission critical as other travel that is already being canceled.  At the same time, airports and flights now offer plenty of "social distancing", and keeping youth players locked up in their homes has its own health disadvantages (and the age segment under 19 seems to be mostly unaffected by coronavirus so far).  Mixed thoughts for sure, but the thought of shutting down travel for games (along with everything else) is depressing ….


----------



## jpeter (Mar 10, 2020)

Husky13 said:


> Is anyone hearing any rumblings about this?  So far, it seems like things are moving ahead (with precautions being taken), but I suspect this is only a matter of time.  I fully appreciate that youth soccer games are not as mission critical as other travel that is already being canceled.  At the same time, airports and flights now offer plenty of "social distancing", and keeping youth players locked up in their homes has its own health disadvantages (and the age segment under 19 seems to be mostly unaffected by coronavirus so far).  Mixed thoughts for sure, but the thought of shutting down travel for games (along with everything else) is depressing ….


Yes the discussion has been ramping up lately with several clubs asking if they don't travel will they be given forfeits or not?

Personally I don't think any club or team should be penalized if they don't feel it's safe to travel.  Maybe it's time to redo the scheduling or have other options to minimize the risks in the short term and encourage local play instead until the fluid situation stabilizes?


----------



## whatithink (Mar 10, 2020)

Husky13 said:


> (and the age segment under 19 seems to be mostly unaffected by coronavirus so far).


but isn't it the ripple effect that would be the concern, i.e. putting people in an environment where they could catch it and carry it back to places that are clear or putting them in contact with people who are higher risk, i.e. a kid could catch it and be unaware and spread it to grandma who visits her friends etc.

Containment is the key to restrict or kill the spread and keep it away from the most vulnerable.


----------



## Husky13 (Mar 10, 2020)

whatithink said:


> but isn't it the ripple effect that would be the concern, i.e. putting people in an environment where they could catch it and carry it back to places that are clear or putting them in contact with people who are higher risk, i.e. a kid could catch it and be unaware and spread it to grandma who visits her friends etc.
> 
> Containment is the key to restrict or kill the spread and keep it away from the most vulnerable.


I understand and don't disagree, to an extent.  However, should kids have to put their lives on hold and be put in quasi-lockdown so grandma can continue visiting her friends?  I realize that may be an unpopular, non-p.c. question, and I fully realize the issue is more complicated than that.  But, think about that particular question.

Now, are travel games for youth soccer important enough in the scheme of things?  I totally get that angle.  I am just saying that at least the older age groups are, in general, best suited to take precautionary steps of self or small group isolation.  In general, with some exceptions, many no longer have jobs that would be put at risk.  Those with underlying health conditions are a trickier subject since they can span all age groups and are more likely to have important, countervailing considerations such as trying to keep their jobs when their family depends on the income, etc.

It will also be interesting to see what happens in Wuhan.  Now, it isn't clear to me whether restrictions have been lifted there yet.  But, does anyone think the Wuhan population is now in the clear and that the virus won't come back?  Is everyone supposed to stay in their homes for an indeterminable period of time?


----------



## sweeperkeeper (Mar 10, 2020)

whatithink said:


> but isn't it the ripple effect that would be the concern, i.e. putting people in an environment where they could catch it and carry it back to places that are clear or putting them in contact with people who are higher risk, i.e. a kid could catch it and be unaware and spread it to grandma who visits her friends etc.
> 
> Containment is the key to restrict or kill the spread and keep it away from the most vulnerable.


This is the point!!!  Kid catches it but doesn't show signs for a week but in that time they go to school and and infect everyone. One of those kids goes home from school to their grand parents house and now you have a 70 + year old with it.  

Even if the risk of spread and contamination was small, I am of the belief that most parents don't really enjoy the cost and time in travelling and will use this as an easy out.


----------



## whatithink (Mar 10, 2020)

Husky13 said:


> I understand and don't disagree, to an extent.  However, should kids have to put their lives on hold and be put in quasi-lockdown so grandma can continue visiting her friends?  I realize that may be an unpopular, non-p.c. question, and I fully realize the issue is more complicated than that.  But, think about that particular question.
> 
> Now, are travel games for youth soccer important enough in the scheme of things?  I totally get that angle.  I am just saying that at least the older age groups are, in general, best suited to take precautionary steps of self or small group isolation.  In general, with some exceptions, many no longer have jobs that would be put at risk.  Those with underlying health conditions are a trickier subject since they can span all age groups and are more likely to have important, countervailing considerations such as trying to keep their jobs when their family depends on the income, etc.
> 
> It will also be interesting to see what happens in Wuhan.  Now, it isn't clear to me whether restrictions have been lifted there yet.  But, does anyone think the Wuhan population is now in the clear and that the virus won't come back?  Is everyone supposed to stay in their homes for an indeterminable period of time?


Well, I would say that there are a lot of knowns (e.g. containment is a workable strategy short term) and unknowns (e.g. how long until its contained) at the moment, as its a new strain.

That said, we do know that it can kill people. We also know that a few kids playing a travel tournament isn't worth the risk with a new virus flying around … they are not putting their lives on hold, they are just missing one tournament out of the hundreds they probably play in their youth soccer "career".

China locked down 10s of millions, if not hundreds of. Italy has locked down the entire country. It seems to be pretty serious.


----------



## Husky13 (Mar 10, 2020)

whatithink said:


> China locked down 10s of millions, if not hundreds of. Italy has locked down the entire country. It seems to be pretty serious.


No need for snide comments.  This discussion was meant to stimulate discussion.  If you can't handle it, you can resort back to observer status.  I think we are all aware that people have died, your comments come across as disrespectful of that.

This isn't about a "travel tournament", that characterization suggests that you don't understand the setting that these kids are playing in.  

That said, I will repeat again that I have very mixed views, since at a high level I totally get that many events that would by most be deemed higher priority than DA soccer have been or are at risk of being canceled.  

But, a close look at the circumstances might make this a closer call:
(1) Most articles looking closely at the risks associated with air travel point out that the risk of catching a virus on a plane stems from touching dirty surfaces on the plane, rather than from circulation of air.  Gloves, hand sanitizer, increased awareness might not completely eliminate the risk, but can mitigate it greatly.
(2) These events are not heavily populated with large crowds bumping up against each other or standing next to each other.  Also, these events are held outdoors, not in enclosed spaces.

At a time when markets are crashing, people are already starting to lose jobs, economic activity is churning to a halt and people are on edge, opportunities for normalcy and some enjoyment ought to at least be considered and shouldn't necessarily be ruled out by broad-brush fear.  That's all.


----------



## whatithink (Mar 10, 2020)

Husky13 said:


> No need for snide comments.  This discussion was meant to stimulate discussion.  If you can't handle it, you can resort back to observer status.  I think we are all aware that people have died, your comments come across as disrespectful of that.
> 
> This isn't about a "travel tournament", that characterization suggests that you don't understand the setting that these kids are playing in.
> 
> ...


I wasn't meaning to be snide and am discussing.

You can catch it on a place, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/09/british-couple-contract-virus-on-flight-from-heathrow-to-vietnam

It isn't the games that are the problem, lots of behind closed door games in various leagues in Europe this weekend for example, its the travelling to/from. the staying in hotels, eating out etc., all of which increase the risk of spread.

I do understand the setting, and I imagine its not all dependent on one showcase.

I do think a certain amount of the media coverage is OTT but the lack of knowledge is the problem. Containment is key to stabilize and also to protect against mutations, it is a virus after all.


----------



## Ansu Fati (Mar 10, 2020)

At this point it's not about containment, but MITIGATION. The cat is already out the bag, there's community spread. We can't stop it. But we need to do as much as we can to try to dampen the surge of sick people flooding our ERs/hospitals- to "flatten the curve" as experts say. We simply do not have enough ICU beds in this country to handle an unchecked outbreak of this magnitude and severity. This is what pummeled Wuhan, and is punishing Italy right now, causing them to shut down.

That is why we are talking social distancing. Canceling large events/gathering including tournaments. Discouraging nonessential travel. Closing schools. If possible working from home. Its everyone doing their part to give our healthcare system a chance a fighting chance.

To me it will be far more depressing (and infuriating) if hospital / ICU beds are maxed out and we can't get our loved ones who get real sick the necessary care, than missing travel games and being stuck at home for weeks.


----------



## Husky13 (Mar 10, 2020)

I don’t disagree with the premise of the last post at all.  I guess I just differ because I take more of a statistical view.  

I am part of a small team that decided our company’s approach to the virus outbreak.  9 days ago, before other major companies started announcing this approach, we moved to a work from home strategy.  I had a loud voice in support of that.  But, we didn’t adopt a 100% approach.  Our focus was to minimize interactions.  If you have 30 employees in a building instead of 150, the risk goes way down (by more than a factor of five).  Some of the 30 are mission critical roles that cannot be performed from home, but some aren’t.

Similarly, I think the mitigation efforts should focus on the highest risk areas.  Huge crowd events.  Subways and buses (work from home).  Other types of interactions that involve close interactions/touches, particularly with larger groups.  

Weigh the risk vs the importance.  A sports trip is pretty low risk, but also low importance, which is why it is a closer call in my opinion.


----------



## Ansu Fati (Mar 10, 2020)

Husky13 said:


> I don’t disagree with the premise of the last post at all.  I guess I just differ because I take more of a statistical view.
> 
> I am part of a small team that decided our company’s approach to the virus outbreak.  9 days ago, before other major companies started announcing this approach, we moved to a work from home strategy.  I had a loud voice in support of that.  But, we didn’t adopt a 100% approach.  Our focus was to minimize interactions.  If you have 30 employees in a building instead of 150, the risk goes way down (by more than a factor of five).  Some of the 30 are mission critical roles that cannot be performed from home, but some aren’t.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with your statistical approach to things.

But if we're talking about a sports trip that involves a plane, or a bus, wouldn't that fall under what you consider highest risk areas? Now if everyone drove separately, then that might be a different story.


----------



## ChalkOnYourBoots (Mar 12, 2020)

Listen to Husky. Keep Grandma and Grandpa at home, take reasonable precautions, and go about your business.

It will be hard to measure, but stress related illnesses and a general decline in quality of life related to the financial panic this has induced will take the biggest toll once this all plays out.

Be smart, but take a minute to look at and understand the statistics.

Perhaps all this will get folks to really ponder the value of our kids unnecessarily travelling hundreds of miles when adequate competition can be found much closer to home... that would be one positive to come from all of this.


----------



## Copa9 (Mar 12, 2020)

Ansu Fati said:


> At this point it's not about containment, but MITIGATION. The cat is already out the bag, there's community spread. We can't stop it. But we need to do as much as we can to try to dampen the surge of sick people flooding our ERs/hospitals- to "flatten the curve" as experts say. We simply do not have enough ICU beds in this country to handle an unchecked outbreak of this magnitude and severity. This is what pummeled Wuhan, and is punishing Italy right now, causing them to shut down.
> 
> That is why we are talking social distancing. Canceling large events/gathering including tournaments. Discouraging nonessential travel. Closing schools. If possible working from home. Its everyone doing their part to give our healthcare system a chance a fighting chance.
> 
> To me it will be far more depressing (and infuriating) if hospital / ICU beds are maxed out and we can't get our loved ones who get real sick the necessary care, than missing travel games and being stuck at home for weeks.


Info only, a friend who lives in Italy said young people and adults are now being infected and hospitalized.  Doctors are making life and death decisions on who gets care because resources are stretched past their limit.  Everyone wash your hands and keep social distancing on the forefront.


----------

