Surf Cup's Fate

[N00B]

Let me try again on the framing, I agree it was a bit broad. This is an issue of CA prohibiting its citizens from going somewhere else to play a sport (soccer as it concerns us in this forum) where people will gather but also where it is legal in an effort to reduce the spread of COVID 19 during a global pandemic.

It's power reach that is the issue, not the fact that it impacts kiddie soccer, and it is that power reach that interferes with issues of interstate commerce, contracts, and substantive due process. Can you think of any regulation where one State prohibits its residents from participating in lawful activity while they’re in another State?

I think you’d agree with me that the State has a legitimate and compelling public interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens, whether it is a global pandemic, local epidemic, or even noon on a Tuesday, right? For that reason I disagree that it matters for purposes of precedent setting whether this particular pandemic is a distinguishing context for such a reach. The distinguishing thing here is the reach itself in trying to combat a virus when compared to other pandemics.

Someone on this thread mentioned STD’s being down. So here’s an example. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an enormous health crisis and is also categorized as a global pandemic, one we’ve been in for decades. I’m not 50 and I remember the hysteria of the AIDS epidemic in the 80s. Americans report approximately 20 million new STIs to the CDC every year and it is rising. Certain STIs are linked to cancer, not curable, and new cases of STIs are disproportionately high in people aged 15-24 who are the most sexually active (i.e. people spreading the disease) and do not treat because they are more often uninsured and the symptoms often don’t present until more serious health conditions arise. Sound familiar? Yet it is undisputed that all STIs are preventable and for this reason prostitution is illegal in CA. BUT, there is no law or regulation prohibiting Californians from hiring prostitutes while in certain counties in Nevada or abroad where it is legal. Why not? Similarly Los Angeles County a few years ago, using the justification that porn actors were spreading STIs into the community required the actors to wear condoms during filming in the County. So the locations of filming moved outside the County. If the justification is real, why the did the County not require all porn actors living in the County to always use protection when filming regardless of location?

Maybe it is because the positivity rate and death rate associated with STIs is within a range that is acceptable to society? Maybe it is because they are transmitted through sexual acts instead of through the air, but still to unsuspecting citizens. Those are ridiculous distinctions if the concern is about public health and eliminating a pandemic. You say no one cares about kiddie soccer, well who the hell cares enough about dudes hiring prostitutes to keep such a ban off the books?

Yes 300,000 Americans have died and it’s tragic and awful and fairly close to home for me. A person in my office lost her father last month to COVID. Is that what this is about, hitting a large number of deaths is justification for banning legal activity in another State? If so, what was the triggering number?

If we want prevent COVID from coming into CA, we need to lock it down, we need real quarantines, not just kiddie soccer ones? How many truck drivers do you think cross in and out of CA every single day? And people want to talk about a 1,000 families (if that) from CA traveling for youth sports like it is somehow the difference maker to ending this pandemic? CA truck stops along I10 have see more out of state truckers in a month than Reach 11 will see in a year and I'm sure you've seen all the precautions they're taking to prevent the spread of COVID. That is just one of many truck routes into the State.

I hear you when you say it has to be realistic and attainable. Why is it not? There is a whole industry out there because CA already has greater restrictions on the number of axles, etc. I see huge opportunity here for the industry to expand increasing employment opportunity, not only in CA but in bordering States, consisting of CA truckers at the borders dropping off loads leaving CA and taking over loads entering CA where the delivery of those goods that are perishable, cannot wait, or even where the shipper or end consumer doesn't want to wait for a quarantine period. Is there an economic impact, yes, but what is compared to dragging this nonsense we're going through along endlessly? As it is right now, to my knowledge, truckers are only asked if they have any symptoms and if they say they're not, they are allowed to proceed.

Isn’t there a distinction between essential travel (truck drivers) and non-essential travel (leisure/recreation... I.e tournaments)? Restrictions on travel are thus differentiated from restrictions on out of state activities. Net effect, however, is the same.

 

[watfly]

Cheerleading was always in the yellow tier if indoors. I guess CIF is saying its impractical to move either basketball or cheerleading outdoors....true? I thought the entire big Florida cheer competition took place outdoors...at least that's what Netflix tells me?

Yeah, I assume sideline cheerleading is OK (even though there is nothing to cheer for). Competitive cheerleading is typically indoors, but easily moved outdoors. Hopefully the cheer squads will lobby for that.

 

[46n2]

Thank you for your kind words, but have you seen the schedule or are you just speculating that its water down , just curious where the science is in your thought.
We're a top club and still attending .

 

[happy9]

Oh Im not offended honey, Im just tired of people. Once the sun sets again and teams can play regularly , alot of you will get off your little imaginary plane ride and realize that during this break all of the top team have been staying quiet and working and will again sweep each team like they have pre covid....(even during)

I found your post hilarious thats all,

1 Just to be clear you opt'ed out because of no competition or schedules ????.

2. How do you know who's playing.

3. Who's the real Karen here.

4. Too say a bold statement like that you must have a amazing team thats got more hardware then anyone else in the past 3 year?

5. worst yet , your coach probably fed you that line .

1. Yes to both
2 We know know who's not playing, and it's not the "best of the best",
3. You
4. We haven't won any hardware, it's usualy won by the mighty socal teams or the powerhouses of TX, CO, GA
5. I hardly ever talk to the coaches, they coach, my kids play, I watch. Normally we are CA twice a month, this year not so much, you are here every weekend. Coaches really don't have time to talk to us.

 

[MrCruett]

They have articles on that site.... just thought the articles were promotion pieces to drive traffic from such hard hitting sources as Yahoo.

There definitely some very reliable hard hitting pieces on that site.

 

[happy9]

Thank you for your kind words, but have you seen the schedule or are you just speculating that its water down , just curious where the science is in your thought.
We're a top club and still attending .

Clarify science and thought. We likely agree on the topic of science, soccer, and the virus. We likely disagree on making choices based on information available. That's where we would agree to disagree. Again, safe travels, the weather will be lovely.

 

[46n2]

I look forward to watching my kids play, will you be watching games?

 

[DFTibor]

Isn’t there a distinction between essential travel (truck drivers) and non-essential travel (leisure/recreation... I.e tournaments)? Restrictions on travel are thus differentiated from restrictions on out of state activities. Net effect, however, is the same.

Yes, there is a distinction in the guidance. My point is I don't believe a State has the authority nor should have the authority to legislate my conduct when I am outside of its boundaries and conducting myself lawfully within the State I'm visiting or residing in. If we're going to go to that length to combat this virus in the name of preventing further introduction of COVID into the State, then the more appropriate measure is a mandatory quarantine period for all travelers coming into the State regardless of purpose.

 

[Lavey29]

300,000 people are dead and another 3,000 plus every day. Not 14 like you claim. People aren’t dying odd heartburn and other “comorbidities” at catastrophic numbers as you claim.

Suck it up buttercup. It’s no wonder so many kids are having a hard time. There are a lot of parents like you out there who would prefer to whine and wallow in self pity instead of finding ways to keep you children moving forward. I can’t imagine having to live in a house with a dad who spends all his time complaining about how everything is someone else’s fault. Woe is you.

Such a tough little sheep from behind his keyboard locked away in his bubble. I guarantee he does not even have any children involved in youth soccer yet on here 24/7 belittling everyone. What a complete tool desperate for attention trying to feel important and most certainly the smartest sheep in the room.

 

[EOTL]

Let me try again on the framing, I agree it was a bit broad. This is an issue of CA prohibiting its citizens from going somewhere else to play a sport (soccer as it concerns us in this forum) where people will gather but also where it is legal in an effort to reduce the spread of COVID 19 during a global pandemic.

It's power reach that is the issue, not the fact that it impacts kiddie soccer, and it is that power reach that interferes with issues of interstate commerce, contracts, and substantive due process. Can you think of any regulation where one State prohibits its residents from participating in lawful activity while they’re in another State?

I think you’d agree with me that the State has a legitimate and compelling public interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens, whether it is a global pandemic, local epidemic, or even noon on a Tuesday, right? For that reason I disagree that it matters for purposes of precedent setting whether this particular pandemic is a distinguishing context for such a reach. The distinguishing thing here is the reach itself in trying to combat a virus when compared to other pandemics.

Someone on this thread mentioned STD’s being down. So here’s an example. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an enormous health crisis and is also categorized as a global pandemic, one we’ve been in for decades. I’m not 50 and I remember the hysteria of the AIDS epidemic in the 80s. Americans report approximately 20 million new STIs to the CDC every year and it is rising. Certain STIs are linked to cancer, not curable, and new cases of STIs are disproportionately high in people aged 15-24 who are the most sexually active (i.e. people spreading the disease) and do not treat because they are more often uninsured and the symptoms often don’t present until more serious health conditions arise. Sound familiar? Yet it is undisputed that all STIs are preventable and for this reason prostitution is illegal in CA. BUT, there is no law or regulation prohibiting Californians from hiring prostitutes while in certain counties in Nevada or abroad where it is legal. Why not? Similarly Los Angeles County a few years ago, using the justification that porn actors were spreading STIs into the community required the actors to wear condoms during filming in the County. So the locations of filming moved outside the County. If the justification is real, why the did the County not require all porn actors living in the County to always use protection when filming regardless of location?

Maybe it is because the positivity rate and death rate associated with STIs is within a range that is acceptable to society? Maybe it is because they are transmitted through sexual acts instead of through the air, but still to unsuspecting citizens. Those are ridiculous distinctions if the concern is about public health and eliminating a pandemic. You say no one cares about kiddie soccer, well who the hell cares enough about dudes hiring prostitutes to keep such a ban off the books?

Yes 300,000 Americans have died and it’s tragic and awful and fairly close to home for me. A person in my office lost her father last month to COVID. Is that what this is about, hitting a large number of deaths is justification for banning legal activity in another State? If so, what was the triggering number?

If we want prevent COVID from coming into CA, we need to lock it down, we need real quarantines, not just kiddie soccer ones? How many truck drivers do you think cross in and out of CA every single day? And people want to talk about a 1,000 families (if that) from CA traveling for youth sports like it is somehow the difference maker to ending this pandemic? CA truck stops along I10 have see more out of state truckers in a month than Reach 11 will see in a year and I'm sure you've seen all the precautions they're taking to prevent the spread of COVID. That is just one of many truck routes into the State.

I hear you when you say it has to be realistic and attainable. Why is it not? There is a whole industry out there because CA already has greater restrictions on the number of axles, etc. I see huge opportunity here for the industry to expand increasing employment opportunity, not only in CA but in bordering States, consisting of CA truckers at the borders dropping off loads leaving CA and taking over loads entering CA where the delivery of those goods that are perishable, cannot wait, or even where the shipper or end consumer doesn't want to wait for a quarantine period. Is there an economic impact, yes, but what is compared to dragging this nonsense we're going through along endlessly? As it is right now, to my knowledge, truckers are only asked if they have any symptoms and if they say they're not, they are allowed to proceed.

Somebody’s so angry they couldn’t stop writing. No, CA probably cannot keep someone from doing stupid things out of state. But it certainly has many legal tools make your life miserable when you return. It could make you quarantine and arrest your ass if you didn’t. A city could potentially take away a club’s business license for violating regulations as rumor has it Santa Clara has done. Presumably the state could implement regs that do the same. CA has every right to take action against idiots wjo try to endanger its responsible citizens.

But, mostly, it can punish you by keeping schools, restaurants, bars, etc. closed, and ruin your kid’s ability to get recruited by collegesor even play soccer for less than $500 a weekend for as long as it takes for you to get the point, which you never will. So your punishment is that it costs you $500 for your kid to play soccer until a vaccine is widely available.

 

[Messi>CR7]

Here's the 16 page NFHSA Medical Advisory Committee guidance published back in the fall - https://nfhs.org/media/3812287/2020...nd-activities-nfhs-smac-may-15_2020-final.pdf

Below are their definitions and, importantly, criteria for grouping the sports into different tiers (which is the minimum the gov owes the players and the families)

per NFHSA, soccer is moderate risk i.e. should be red tier.

Almost every state - including WA and OR - California is following their guidance, but not California.

@Kante, you're too logical for these discussions. (BTW, I miss reading your boys game prediction/analysis). Imagine the shitstorm governor will receive if he puts soccer in the moderate tier and his daughter gets to play club soccer before high school football is allowed.

 

[LASTMAN14]

Hello, hello, hello...echo. Too funny.

 

[MacDre]

Let me try again on the framing, I agree it was a bit broad. This is an issue of CA prohibiting its citizens from going somewhere else to play a sport (soccer as it concerns us in this forum) where people will gather but also where it is legal in an effort to reduce the spread of COVID 19 during a global pandemic.

It's power reach that is the issue, not the fact that it impacts kiddie soccer, and it is that power reach that interferes with issues of interstate commerce, contracts, and substantive due process. Can you think of any regulation where one State prohibits its residents from participating in lawful activity while they’re in another State?

I think you’d agree with me that the State has a legitimate and compelling public interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens, whether it is a global pandemic, local epidemic, or even noon on a Tuesday, right? For that reason I disagree that it matters for purposes of precedent setting whether this particular pandemic is a distinguishing context for such a reach. The distinguishing thing here is the reach itself in trying to combat a virus when compared to other pandemics.

Someone on this thread mentioned STD’s being down. So here’s an example. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an enormous health crisis and is also categorized as a global pandemic, one we’ve been in for decades. I’m not 50 and I remember the hysteria of the AIDS epidemic in the 80s. Americans report approximately 20 million new STIs to the CDC every year and it is rising. Certain STIs are linked to cancer, not curable, and new cases of STIs are disproportionately high in people aged 15-24 who are the most sexually active (i.e. people spreading the disease) and do not treat because they are more often uninsured and the symptoms often don’t present until more serious health conditions arise. Sound familiar? Yet it is undisputed that all STIs are preventable and for this reason prostitution is illegal in CA. BUT, there is no law or regulation prohibiting Californians from hiring prostitutes while in certain counties in Nevada or abroad where it is legal. Why not? Similarly Los Angeles County a few years ago, using the justification that porn actors were spreading STIs into the community required the actors to wear condoms during filming in the County. So the locations of filming moved outside the County. If the justification is real, why the did the County not require all porn actors living in the County to always use protection when filming regardless of location?

Maybe it is because the positivity rate and death rate associated with STIs is within a range that is acceptable to society? Maybe it is because they are transmitted through sexual acts instead of through the air, but still to unsuspecting citizens. Those are ridiculous distinctions if the concern is about public health and eliminating a pandemic. You say no one cares about kiddie soccer, well who the hell cares enough about dudes hiring prostitutes to keep such a ban off the books?

Yes 300,000 Americans have died and it’s tragic and awful and fairly close to home for me. A person in my office lost her father last month to COVID. Is that what this is about, hitting a large number of deaths is justification for banning legal activity in another State? If so, what was the triggering number?

If we want prevent COVID from coming into CA, we need to lock it down, we need real quarantines, not just kiddie soccer ones? How many truck drivers do you think cross in and out of CA every single day? And people want to talk about a 1,000 families (if that) from CA traveling for youth sports like it is somehow the difference maker to ending this pandemic? CA truck stops along I10 have see more out of state truckers in a month than Reach 11 will see in a year and I'm sure you've seen all the precautions they're taking to prevent the spread of COVID. That is just one of many truck routes into the State.

I hear you when you say it has to be realistic and attainable. Why is it not? There is a whole industry out there because CA already has greater restrictions on the number of axles, etc. I see huge opportunity here for the industry to expand increasing employment opportunity, not only in CA but in bordering States, consisting of CA truckers at the borders dropping off loads leaving CA and taking over loads entering CA where the delivery of those goods that are perishable, cannot wait, or even where the shipper or end consumer doesn't want to wait for a quarantine period. Is there an economic impact, yes, but what is compared to dragging this nonsense we're going through along endlessly? As it is right now, to my knowledge, truckers are only asked if they have any symptoms and if they say they're not, they are allowed to proceed.

Compelling analysis but I think we just frame issues differently. I don’t see a power grab or a prohibition on out of state activities. I do see an order that attempts to keep folks from circumventing orders issued by the State of California in hopes of reducing the spread of COVID. The governor has gaffed a few times but I haven’t seen any evidence of him preventing out of state activity. If you were governor, and wanted to save lives by preventing folks from circumventing orders issued to slow the spread of COVID, what would you do differently?

A complete lockdown is too extreme and would hurt all more than the current restrictions. If we took the lockdown to the extreme and closed all ports (airports, seaports, international borders, and state lines) we would decimate small businesses and the economy. Do you like can food? How would we distribute the vaccine with the airports closed? Do you really want to shut it all down?

 

[happy9]

I look forward to watching my kids play, will you be watching games?

I will not be watching games. Great time of the year in AZ to head to the great outdoors. We'll have plenty of soccer to watch come the second weekend JAN and beyond. Crossing fingers that HS season commences for my oldest. My youngest has opted out of HS t and will be taking part in friendlies until the club season in AZ kicks off again.

 

[happy9]

Yes, there is a distinction in the guidance. My point is I don't believe a State has the authority nor should have the authority to legislate my conduct when I am outside of its boundaries and conducting myself lawfully within the State I'm visiting or residing in. If we're going to go to that length to combat this virus in the name of preventing further introduction of COVID into the State, then the more appropriate measure is a mandatory quarantine period for all travelers coming into the State regardless of purpose.

It's a line few if any governments are willing to cross. That's where civil liberties, the constitution, ect come into play. People have to be convinced, based on common sense policy, to do the right thing. Arbitrary words with lack of believable science to back things up just pisses people off, especially business owners. There's no enforcement appetite for it other than some politician spewing off at the mouth of how he/she is going to save everyone.

NYC has tried variations of it all summer long and just as recent as NOV. Checkpoints along bridges and train points of entry. It generated headlines but that's about it. Didn't work, won't work, not gonna work. The virus is going to spread. I tell you what's about to work in NYC, a snowstorm. At least for a few days anyway.

The only way to force people to not travel outside of the state is to go after organizations that are participating or encouraging people to travel outside of the state.

Crazy times.

 

[happy9]

Thank you for your kind words, but have you seen the schedule or are you just speculating that its water down , just curious where the science is in your thought.
We're a top club and still attending .

I don't know if I have to see a schedule. I should be able to rely on my club to surmise that the teams we normally play are not going and the teams that we would like to play are not going. So I guess science isn't being applied. Clubs have relationships, they talk. Logistically, Surf is easy for me and many in our club. Reach and SSC are less than 20 mins for many. The eastern fields are a haul but we would be playing at Reach.

If you are a strong team, and other traditionally strong teams in your age group/league aren't going, then the play on the field is going to be different than what you are used to.

 

[notintheface]

If you were governor, and wanted to save lives by preventing folks from circumventing orders issued to slow the spread of COVID, what would you do differently?

Quoted for truth.

 

[ITFC Blues]

On this, we can agree. You might also change "week" into "August", but hey.

We're 12 days out from Surf Youngers and no schedule posted. There are definitely tournaments that hold off until the last minute, but Surf are running out of time for coach conflicts, parent scheduling ("do we make the drive early Sunday or late Saturday night"), etc. I'd be getting nervous for my $1400 right about now.

This is on the surf cup site now:

Submitting an application does not guarantee acceptance; Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a governmental order cancels the event or prevents your team from traveling to the event, you will receive a full refund minus any credit card processing transaction fee

 

[dad4]

It's a line few if any governments are willing to cross. That's where civil liberties, the constitution, ect come into play. People have to be convinced, based on common sense policy, to do the right thing. Arbitrary words with lack of believable science to back things up just pisses people off, especially business owners. There's no enforcement appetite for it other than some politician spewing off at the mouth of how he/she is going to save everyone.

NYC has tried variations of it all summer long and just as recent as NOV. Checkpoints along bridges and train points of entry. It generated headlines but that's about it. Didn't work, won't work, not gonna work. The virus is going to spread. I tell you what's about to work in NYC, a snowstorm. At least for a few days anyway.

The only way to force people to not travel outside of the state is to go after organizations that are participating or encouraging people to travel outside of the state.

Crazy times.

New Mexico and Hawaii also had quarantine restrictions on anyone arriving from out of state. it seemed to be a reasonable response to a bad situation. It also seemed to help.

I’m not convinced that better science would help. There is plenty of good science that shows that bars and restaurants spread covid. But people don’t want to believe it, so they cover their ears and say that there is no proof.

 

[happy9]

If you were governor, and wanted to save lives by preventing folks from circumventing orders issued to slow the spread of COVID, what would you do differently?

Compelling question and very easy to armchair quarterback. Since this is a soccer forum, he should have modeled what other states did to support youth sports. Plenty of models to follow. I'm sure some where enacted by friends of Gavi. NJ comes to come, playing tournaments in early summer. Places like Maryland, MA had procedures, systems in place that allowed for sports to continue. I bet you would have played with masks on, like they do in MA. A smart, regionally based approach to youth sports would have cut down drastically on travel to AZ to play soccer. Now, with that said, I don't think travelling to AZ has anything to do with current Covid trends, but that's another topic to discuss.

So, within our narrow view (soccer), the government of california should have been able to come up with a viable plan to support kids in the state.

Imagine all the time people wouldn't have spent on here talking about not playing soccer.

So yea, complete shutdown is dumb (like you stated).

 

[Grace T.]

A complete lockdown is too extreme and would hurt all more than the current restrictions. If we took the lockdown to the extreme and closed all ports (airports, seaports, international borders, and state lines) we would decimate small businesses and the economy. Do you like can food? How would we distribute the vaccine with the airports closed? Do you really want to shut it all down?

The problem is that short of a full scale Australian lockdown, the limited lockdown, distancing, and mask interventions seem to help only minimally. In the most recent months, if you compare region over region in the US, the curves all follow the same pattern regardless of government policy. That means we are placing a huge cost (hurting kids, hurting small businesses, causing people to go unemployed) for not a whole lot of benefit. Such policies should have been reserved for the peaks of the initial wave and the current wave, instead of squandered over the summer when it did minimal good.