No games until 2021

MacDre said:
I have some serious doubts as to the veracity of your statement regarding unknown risk.

COVID sucks for all but complaining doesn’t help. I guess I’m a make lemonade out of lemons type of guy. Isn’t mental fortitude an important quality for a keeper? What about the adage “if it doesn’t kill you, it will make you stronger?”
Click to expand...
"I have some serious doubts as to the veracity of your statement regarding unknown risk."

LOL...I am a high risk person who was knocking on deaths door for 2 weeks 18 years ago and have no intention of doing that again not because of fear (they give you enough drugs when you are at that point you don't even know you are at deaths door and I know Heaven is a great place), but because I don't want to leave my kids without a parent right now. So....as I am sure you can understand, I have looked at playing soccer from every different direction possible including reviewing scientific studies and the following information:

1. Outdoor dining with no masks has been allowed for months with no set backs.
2. Arizona is one of the few states that has almost reached testing targets since they were scared straight and have been playing the game with no outbreaks and is at the same State risk level as California (California is NOT near testing targets).
3. New York and neighboring states continue to reach testing targets and have been playing the game with no outbreaks.
4. The CDC is condoning outdoor activity with precautions.
5. The SEC and ACCN games have been back to playing for several weeks now with no reported outbreaks because of the game. (I am creating a drinking game to drink every time you see a coach touch the front of their mask or pull up their mask when the camera is on them.)
6. CDC-
"The virus most often spreads through people who have symptoms." (I doubt a majority of parents would permit their child to play with symptoms of COVID which is "most often" how the virus spreads)....even if they do;
7. CDC-Considerations for who should get tested
  • People who have symptoms of COVID-19
  • People who have had close contact (within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes) with someone with confirmed COVID-19
Given that: 1."15 minutes" of close contact ("within 6 feet") with an infected person is the low bar set for determining the need for testing and scientific studies support the 15 minute rule; 2. the nature of the game that limits the possibility of having 15 minutes of close contact ("within 6 feet") especially face to face (when in close contact players are usually looking down at the ball and/or are side by side and generally involves seconds of close contact); 3. all of the other live experiments in 40 something other states (many higher risk states) and 4. 47 other states and their medical experts have given approval to play soccer games, playing the game appears to be a very low risk activity.

In addition, when I considered the potential spread to my community if all of the above was proven to be wrong and there was a spread linked to a soccer game, I looked at the protocols of masks and social distancing that have been scientifically proven to diminish the risk of spread and my own live experiments (1. Client with 400 employees in Santa Ana a hot spot that has been working indoors since April with mask requirements and cubicle dividers, and has only had isolated incidents with no spread, and 2. My friend that is in management at a residential facility with protocols in place that also has had isolated incidents with no spread).

I see the greatest risk of spread is at the sidelines and gatherings. That is where protocols are very very important and enforcement is necessary.
 
Grace T. said:
I'd agree with this. It would also allow the players/families time to organize blackmarket pickup scrimmages and/or finalize Arizona/NV/Ut tournament plans. Would also give clarity for who's in and whose out. While they are at it, they really need to pull the trigger on State Cup too....the youngers at least won't be able to make it given that even a truncated season would run into it.
Click to expand...

For CAN, State Cup has been pushed out to spring for the youngers. What's happening in CAS?
 
crush said:
That means I've paid for one whole seasons worth of games and guess how many games my $3000 gave me? Zippo!!!
Click to expand...

Not directed at you, Crush, but I think this comment is reflective of the thoughts of many SoCal Soccer parents this year.

I think many parents ‘feel’ they’re not getting what they paid for. Probably due to a lack of transparency at many clubs regarding club fees, combined with the letter league recruiting that goes on. It’s easy to correlate fees with games, but in most cases the majority of those club fees are for training, not league related costs.
 
N00B said:
Not directed at you, Crush, but I think this comment is reflective of the thoughts of many SoCal Soccer parents this year.

I think many parents ‘feel’ they’re not getting what they paid for. Probably due to a lack of transparency at many clubs regarding club fees, combined with the letter league recruiting that goes on. It’s easy to correlate fees with games, but in most cases the majority of those club fees are for training, not league related costs.
Click to expand...
I hear ya and I have no issues with paying $3,000 for training. However, If I know what I know today, I would have sat out and kept my $3000 and gave it to my dd towards college. At this rate, socal girls will not play in a local soccer game for a long time and she might as well go try something else to play. Woe is me and I'm only talking to myself. I knew all the risk and Eagle was right and I was wrong. I lost two bets and $3,000. The training has sucked and its not the coaches fault. It sucks because it's weak 6 x 6.
 
N00B said:
Not directed at you, Crush, but I think this comment is reflective of the thoughts of many SoCal Soccer parents this year.

I think many parents ‘feel’ they’re not getting what they paid for. Probably due to a lack of transparency at many clubs regarding club fees, combined with the letter league recruiting that goes on. It’s easy to correlate fees with games, but in most cases the majority of those club fees are for training, not league related costs.
Click to expand...

crush said:
I hear ya and I have no issues with paying $3,000 for training. However, If I know what I know today, I would have sat out and kept my $3000 and gave it to my dd towards college. At this rate, socal girls will not play in a local soccer game for a long time and she might as well go try something else to play. Woe is me and I'm only talking to myself. I knew all the risk and Eagle was right and I was wrong. I lost two bets and $3,000. The training has sucked and its not the coaches fault. It sucks because it's weak 6 x 6.
Click to expand...


Economically really what you are paying for is: a) to reserve your spot on the particular team, and b) any socialization your kid gets out of it. If you are talking pure soccer skills, assuming the coaches are observing the distancing rules and not holding blackmarket scrimmages or going out of state, you'd be better off pouring the money into a private trainer for the year and sparing yourself the coaching fees/field rentals/uniform costs.

It's really hard for parents to plan anything, though. My kid is playing down, the fees are really cheap, as a GK I don't mind he'd be missing his first year in the big goal (known as the "hell year" to most aspiring goalkeepers), so if socializing with his teammates keeps him going through the craziness I'm ok with it.
 
EOTL said:
That doesn’t answer the question. This is the same evasive nonsense argument that kids aren’t killing each other, so it must be fine if they kill their family and other adults around them.
Click to expand...
What you term evasive (cause you like to stir shit up) is the simple reality. It isn’t happening...the data proves it.
You don’t understand the plight because you can in no way relate. So sit down unless called upon cause you have ZERO to add.

Have a nice day!
 
Kicker4Life said:
What you term evasive (cause you like to stir shit up) is the simple reality. It isn’t happening...the data proves it.
You don’t understand the plight because you can in no way relate. So sit down unless called upon cause you have ZERO to add.

Have a nice day!
Click to expand...
Hey Kicker, I know you to be a very strong dad. If I were to lose my boxing match with this dude EOTL, would you like to jump the line of Messy to get crack at him? EOTL, you cool with that? Also, many people on here have multiple avatars. If you happen to be Maps EOTL, the fight is 100% off and you and Kicker can go at it.........:)
 
MacDre said:
My daughters best friend is Chilean. She’s 100% of European decent and very tall. On the other hand, there’s a Peruvian girl in her class that’s 100% Native American and very short....yeah, it’s complicated.

I think it’s as clear as mud if you are “mestizo” whether you qualify for affirmative action. It complicates things further that most Americans don’t have passports or travel to Latin America and don’t understand the social dynamics of those countries.

I think many Latinos/Hispanics claim their European heritage over their Indigenous because of discrimination due to caste system in all of these places from Colonialism.
Click to expand...
Palease
 
Just an observation. It seems that the burden of proof for reopening is upon the reopeners, whereas being shutdown is the unprecedented anomaly, but is being treated as the normal course currently. How did this get flipped on us? Its ironic that those who are reluctant to reopening only have to criticize the evidence presented by the reopeners but provide no evidence to support continued closures.

The burden of proof should be on the unprecedented anomaly, not the normal.
 
Kicker4Life said:
What you term evasive (cause you like to stir shit up) is the simple reality. It isn’t happening...the data proves it.
You don’t understand the plight because you can in no way relate. So sit down unless called upon cause you have ZERO to add.

Have a nice day!
Click to expand...

Nope, not sitting down.

How many people are dying because people under 19 are spreading it? We all know it’s uncommon for them to kill each other, but how many other people are they killing? How many are they infecting when they carpool to their sports? When they check into hotel rooms? When they eat out? When they go home? And while I’m asking, how many people need to die overall before you will be willing to admit that you were wrong?

Of course, the answer is that you don’t care how many people die in order for your kid to play their little kiddie sport. Her coach? Fine. School teacher? Whatevs. Her teammate’s parent? Sure, they never signed up for snacks anyway. It’s the American way to not give a s**t about anyone other than yourself which, of course, is exactly why you’re still in this predicament.
 
watfly said:
Just an observation. It seems that the burden of proof for reopening is upon the reopeners, whereas being shutdown is the unprecedented anomaly, but is being treated as the normal course currently. How did this get flipped on us? Its ironic that those who are reluctant to reopening only have to criticize the evidence presented by the reopeners but provide no evidence to support continued closures.

The burden of proof should be on the unprecedented anomaly, not the normal.
Click to expand...

Well, the corrollary to this as well is that there has been a complete lack of cost/benefit analysis being done for any restrictions advocated. Particularly in California, it's been (with the exception of Disneyland because that is the thing that would break the dam wide open) which constituency group squaks the loudest and how much clout they have.
 
EOTL said:
Nope, not sitting down.

How many people are dying because people under 19 are spreading it? We all know it’s uncommon for them to kill each other, but how many other people are they killing? How many are they infecting when they carpool to their sports? When they check into hotel rooms? When they eat out? When they go home? And while I’m asking, how many people need to die overall before you will be willing to admit that you were wrong?

Of course, the answer is that you don’t care how many people die in order for your kid to play their little kiddie sport. Her coach? Fine. School teacher? Whatevs. Her teammate’s parent? Sure, they never signed up for snacks anyway. It’s the American way to not give a s**t about anyone other than yourself which, of course, is exactly why you’re still in this predicament.
Click to expand...
Show me a report that detail, conclusively how many have....until then, have a seat!

By the way, congratulations to Coach Bowden, 90 and beat the Rona!
 
EOTL said:
How many people are dying because people under 19 are spreading it? We all know it’s uncommon for them to kill each other, but how many other people are they killing? How many are they infecting when they carpool to their sports? When they check into hotel rooms? When they eat out? When they go home?
Click to expand...
Great questions, I anxiously await your answer.

(Seems to prove the point of my post of a few minutes ago)
 
watfly said:
Just an observation. It seems that the burden of proof for reopening is upon the reopeners, whereas being shutdown is the unprecedented anomaly, but is being treated as the normal course currently. How did this get flipped on us? Its ironic that those who are reluctant to reopening only have to criticize the evidence presented by the reopeners but provide no evidence to support continued closures.

The burden of proof should be on the unprecedented anomaly, not the normal.
Click to expand...

220k plus dead people so far. CA continues to have a below avg. infection and death rate despite areas with the highest population densities in the entire U.S. Restrictions are savings lives despite the inordinate number of dumbs**ts who keep f**king it up for those of us who want to get back to work and soccer practice without killing people.

In the end, it doesn’t matter how compelling the evidence, because ya’ll just deny it. Otherwise, you’d answer how many dead people is an acceptable number in exchange for getting what you want.
 
EOTL said:
220k plus dead people so far. CA continues to have a below avg. infection and death rate despite areas with the highest population densities in the entire U.S. Restrictions are savings lives despite the inordinate number of dumbs**ts who keep f**king it up for those of us who want to get back to work and soccer practice without killing people.

In the end, it doesn’t matter how compelling the evidence, because ya’ll just deny it. Otherwise, you’d answer how many dead people is an acceptable number in exchange for getting what you want.
Click to expand...
You are so funny hahaha...you just like to stir the pot, but doesnt it get old??? Do you read any publications or do you just look at the death rate and that is the end all?
 
watfly said:
Just an observation. It seems that the burden of proof for reopening is upon the reopeners, whereas being shutdown is the unprecedented anomaly, but is being treated as the normal course currently. How did this get flipped on us? Its ironic that those who are reluctant to reopening only have to criticize the evidence presented by the reopeners but provide no evidence to support continued closures.

The burden of proof should be on the unprecedented anomaly, not the normal.
Click to expand...

No evidence? Only if you read news filtered to please your preconceptions and desires.
 
Kicker4Life said:
Show me a report that detail, conclusively how many have....until then, have a seat!

By the way, congratulations to Coach Bowden, 90 and beat the Rona!
Click to expand...

Congrats to Bowden, and also to Brian Lee Hutchins, this week’s Herman Cain Memorial Award winner, and first living recipient. Wifey not so lucky though. Maybe she would have survived if he didn’t believe it was a hoax and had taken her to the hospital.
 
soccersc said:
You are so funny hahaha...you just like to stir the pot, but doesnt it get old??? Do you read any publications or do you just look at the death rate and that is the end all?
Click to expand...

I guess this is what you people do when you can’t deny facts. Where’s @MSK357 when you need him?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top