What's your best guess as to when trainings will resume?

[dad4]

There is so much new info coming out daily that shows the spread is only a little bit more than the flu and a lot of research has proven that the quarantine did not change or affect anything. Keep the elderly at home, parents be smart, kids go play and don't worry about all this. dad4, I respect your view and if you don't feel comfortable with your kid practicing or playing until YOU feel it is safe, that is your decision and you can make that. But, I can guarantee a lot of kids are dying to get out and play again and things are going to get going in the next month.

Not really about me. My kid is in the under 12 range that is very unlikely to show symptoms or be a carrier.

I’m more worried about what happens when there are 30 sick people at Surf, all of whom thought they were fine and all of whom thought Surf was too important to miss. But they all stayed in hotels and got in the food lines, and now we have headlines about an estimated 1000 people who got coronavirus at a soccer tournament.

The same number of games at local fields cause many fewer cases and much less disruption.

 

[Soccermaverick]

Don’t follow ignorance to your doom... we are not the only ones...


Brazil’s Health Ministry reported 1,039 new Covid-19 deaths Tuesday evening, compared to 592 deaths reported by the U.S.’ Centers for Disease Control.

Tuesday is the fifth day in a row that Brazil has reported the world’s highest number of daily Covid-19 deaths, totaling nearly 25,000 since the country counted its first case in late February.

The U.S. has been the hardest-hit country in the world for much of the pandemic, but Brazil’s steep fatality rate and increasing number of daily deaths indicate it is rapidly becoming the new Covid-19 hot spot.

The country saw an average of 935 deaths per day last week, with close to 1,200 deaths on Thursday alone, though most experts believe the fatalities have been undercounted—perhaps by as much as 40%, according to some scientists’ estimates. President Jair Bolsonaro has seen his popularity drop significantly since the pandemic began, as he downplays the severity of the virus and continuously attacks social distancing measures, saying a weakened economy could be more deadly than the virus itself.

But 60% of Brazilians support stricter shelter-in-place orders according to a poll released Wednesday, while another poll found 58% of respondents were in favor of Bolsonaro being impeached.Experts believe Covid-19 cases and deaths will only continue to rise in Brazil in the following weeks. According to a Pan American Health Organization model, Brazil could count nearly 89,000 virus deaths by early August. The World Health Organization said Tuesday that the Americas are developing into the new global center of the Covid-19 pandemic, with new cases and deaths expected to continue in Latin American countries throughout the rest of the summer. Brazil was the first Latin American country to report a Covid-19 case on February 26, 2020, and still has the most in the region by far. Experts say sweeping poverty and rampant inequality in Brazil makes the country particularly vulnerable to the virus.

 

[SoccerGuru]

Not really about me. My kid is in the under 12 range that is very unlikely to show symptoms or be a carrier.

I’m more worried about what happens when there are 30 sick people at Surf, all of whom thought they were fine and all of whom thought Surf was too important to miss. But they all stayed in hotels and got in the food lines, and now we have headlines about an estimated 1000 people who got coronavirus at a soccer tournament.

The same number of games at local fields cause many fewer cases and much less disruption.

Then tell your coach you don't feel comfortable and don't go. You are worried about a hypothetical situation while possible it is nowhere near guaranteed, what if the tournament happens and everyone has a fantastic time and the players all have a blast and sleep the whole ride home? You seem to ONLY be looking at what could go wrong, why not look at what could go right?

 

[Eagle33]

Then tell your coach you don't feel comfortable and don't go. You are worried about a hypothetical situation while possible it is nowhere near guaranteed, what if the tournament happens and everyone has a fantastic time and the players all have a blast and sleep the whole ride home? You seem to ONLY be looking at what could go wrong, why not look at what could go right?

yes, master, the truth you speak

 

[StrikerOC]

While I agree 100% with your sentiment, its not up to citizens to choose, its solely up to our politicians (ultimately Newsom) to allow. Over a week ago, SD County sent Newsom a list of activities to accelerate reopening (ie Phase 3 activities to be reopened in current Phase 2). All of the activities have been approved by Newsom with the exception of the request to reopen youth sports training (not to exceed 12 players). I'd be very surprised to see the Surf Cup happen at the beginning of August, but I hope I'm wrong.

I guess I'm in the camp that would be surprised if we weren't open, its only the end of May. As I stated in my original remark, there is no legal basis to pick and choose who or what entity get to exercise their rights. Retail is as well as many business's and public beaches are opening.

I feel safe assuming if teams start getting fields to practice in the next two months then Surf Cup will be a go

 

[dad4]

Then tell your coach you don't feel comfortable and don't go. You are worried about a hypothetical situation while possible it is nowhere near guaranteed, what if the tournament happens and everyone has a fantastic time and the players all have a blast and sleep the whole ride home? You seem to ONLY be looking at what could go wrong, why not look at what could go right?

My kid loved Surf last year. Had a great time. I am well aware of what can go right.

How does it help if I skip it? You guys still hold your tournaments. 23 are fine. 2 have outbreaks. We still get the headlines. And, in an abundance of caution, everyone’s season gets cancelled. My daughter loses her season because someone else wanted to hold an event with 10,000 people.

Normally, I agree with “you do your thing, I do mine.“. It just doesn’t work for infectious disease.

 

[Copa9]

The unfortunate reality, though, is this has become political, and even wrapped up with the presidential election, and for those of us who'd like to see soccer go forward, we live in a blue state. The question is whether a) as we open up, things don't turn noticeably worse, and b) whether pressure can be brought to bear from other countries/states/counties opening up so that people complain. How "bad" the virus is and the science behind all this is almost a side show (with some Republicans saying no masks ever, and some Democrats saying masks everywhere even when outside and exercising). Kid's soccer is now just a pawn in the political game, and I really don't know what's going to happen, but I do believe large tournaments with large crowds and out of state guests are probably not going to be allowed in California (if it happens, it will be scaled back).

What concerns me most are injuries particularly for the olders not the covid. The games can be intense and if the player is not committed to a college, there could be a lot of aggression and fouls to show coaches what they can do, more than normal, and for those who are already committed they don't want to be injured and risk injury if they have not signed their NLI. It takes time to get in "game" condition. Even if they start practicing in small groups next month doubtful they will all be in good physical shape by beginning of August and will they even have any games at all in July. September, October, November would be better.

 

[Dargle]

I think there's a misconception in what goes into answering this question. There are two separate processes that address distinct issues:

1. Public Health/Government Decision

At this level, the decision is NOT about whether it is safe for kids per se. Obviously, if it was particularly bad for kids, that would be a consideration, but the primary concern is the effect on the population generally in the area within the jurisdiction of the governmental unit. That's why things like the size of the gathering, the number of people from out-of-town, whether asymptomatic carriers can spread the disease, the means by which they can spread it, all factor into the equation.

The government lets people go about their lives freely in the flu, even though it can and does harm and kill people, because they believe the overall spread can be contained through vaccines/existing immunity and the public health system can handle the load. For some illnesses, they require kids to be vaccinated to attend school even though the illness isn't really that bad for most kids, in part because they think it's bad for enough kids and the costs of the vaccine are low enough to make it worth it to prevent the spread. The gov't also lets people do all sorts of risky activities that have a higher risk or incidence of death (e.g., driving) as long as they meet certain safety guidelines (passing a driving test to receive a license) because they believe that is enough to contain the overall pressure on societal resources, even though they know that driving will result in more deaths than if everyone walked.

So, this why no one is discussing whether kids get sick, although they may be discussing whether kids can transmit the virus. They are instead focusing on things relevant to transmission rates, such as masks, group sizes, degree and amount of contact, testing, isolation etc. They want it to be phased in slowly, and with certain precautions like masks, to reduce jump-starting the rate of transmission and thereby keep it from overwhelming societal resources. Some people believe herd immunity would be a better way to deal with this issue, but whether government chooses not to follow that is not necessarily because they are trying to save literally everyone in a bubble, but because they have doubts about whether it will work sufficiently to stem the tide or whether it will backfire and accelerate the spread. Sweden's experiment is inconclusive and their population demographics may not be a good match for us.

2. Individual risk

Ending or relaxing the stay-at-home order doesn't say much about whether it's safe for you individually. Once the government and public health authorities move out, that is really just a hand-off of the risk to private actors. That's where groups like Cal South, insurance companies, permit-issuing authorities concerned about facility liability, and clubs come into play. They are considering the question of whether kids can get sick, how badly, and under what level of contact because at that stage the government has withdrawn and the private actors are allowed to decide for themselves what is an acceptable level of risk. The groups may refuse to restart or adopt protocols that are often stricter than what is required by the public health authorities because legal liability is a function of the reasonable standard of care. That standard is about what is reasonable to avoid harm to an individual, whereas the public health standard is about what is necessary to avoid harm to the community more generally. The former is often high than the latter, although there are ways to reduce what is the reasonable standard of care such as broad governmental grants of immunity that effectively shift the burden to the participant or parent to make the decision. Waivers are an attempt to shift that burden privately by contract, although courts will scrutinize them to make sure that they were granted voluntarily and with full information, which is usually where they fail.

Bottom line - we're still at Stage 1, where the effect on kids is less relevant than whether they can be asymptomatic carriers. The effect on kids comes into play in Stage 2, which is why you could see governments open up, while clubs still have difficulty fully resuming full play. Only at Stage 2 is it relevant that a parent is willing to take the risk for their kid, since they may be willing to sign the most ironclad waiver available (although insurance companies and facility owners have to factor in the risk that the waiver won't hold up in court even if you think now that you will sign away all of your rights forever). Assumption of risk is irrelevant in Stage 1.

 

[Ellejustus]

What concerns me most are injuries particularly for the olders not the covid. The games can be intense and if the player is not committed to a college, there could be a lot of aggression and fouls to show coaches what they can do, more than normal, and for those who are already committed they don't want to be injured and risk injury if they have not signed their NLI. It takes time to get in "game" condition. Even if they start practicing in small groups next month doubtful they will all be in good physical shape by beginning of August and will they even have any games at all in July. September, October, November would be better.

Play Ball!!!

 

[watfly]

I guess I'm in the camp that would be surprised if we weren't open, its only the end of May. As I stated in my original remark, there is no legal basis to pick and choose who or what entity get to exercise their rights. Retail is as well as many business's and public beaches are opening.

I feel safe assuming if teams start getting fields to practice in the next two months then Surf Cup will be a go

I'm normally glass half full guy, but your more optimistic in this case than I am. I haven't seen any real legal basis for Newsom's decisions, they're at his own will and arbritary in many cases. That's why this situation is so frustrating. SD County asked for 12 person training and was only approved for one on one training (1 trainer and 1 player).

From a safety standpoint, is sitting down for a meal at a restaurant any safer that having 12 kids outside kicking a ball around. There is zero scientific basis for it and I would happily dine in at this point and would welcome with no hesitation for my kid to begin training. Let's be honest, most kids I know are already hanging out with other kids, including mine under certain circumstances. My spouse and I decide what's best for our kids, not the government without some valid basis.

The good news is the Surf Cup is hosted in San Diego County and not LA County.

 

[jpeter]

I think there's a misconception in what goes into answering this question. There are two separate processes that address distinct issues:

1. Public Health/Government Decision

At this level, the decision is NOT about whether it is safe for kids per se. Obviously, if it was particularly bad for kids, that would be a consideration, but the primary concern is the effect on the population generally in the area within the jurisdiction of the governmental unit. That's why things like the size of the gathering, the number of people from out-of-town, whether asymptomatic carriers can spread the disease, the means by which they can spread it, all factor into the equation.

The government lets people go about their lives freely in the flu, even though it can and does harm and kill people, because they believe the overall spread can be contained through vaccines/existing immunity and the public health system can handle the load. For some illnesses, they require kids to be vaccinated to attend school even though the illness isn't really that bad for most kids, in part because they think it's bad for enough kids and the costs of the vaccine are low enough to make it worth it to prevent the spread. The gov't also lets people do all sorts of risky activities that have a higher risk or incidence of death (e.g., driving) as long as they meet certain safety guidelines (passing a driving test to receive a license) because they believe that is enough to contain the overall pressure on societal resources, even though they know that driving will result in more deaths than if everyone walked.

So, this why no one is discussing whether kids get sick, although they may be discussing whether kids can transmit the virus. They are instead focusing on things relevant to transmission rates, such as masks, group sizes, degree and amount of contact, testing, isolation etc. They want it to be phased in slowly, and with certain precautions like masks, to reduce jump-starting the rate of transmission and thereby keep it from overwhelming societal resources. Some people believe herd immunity would be a better way to deal with this issue, but whether government chooses not to follow that is not necessarily because they are trying to save literally everyone in a bubble, but because they have doubts about whether it will work sufficiently to stem the tide or whether it will backfire and accelerate the spread. Sweden's experiment is inconclusive and their population demographics may not be a good match for us.

2. Individual risk

Ending or relaxing the stay-at-home order doesn't say much about whether it's safe for you individually. Once the government and public health authorities move out, that is really just a hand-off of the risk to private actors. That's where groups like Cal South, insurance companies, permit-issuing authorities concerned about facility liability, and clubs come into play. They are considering the question of whether kids can get sick, how badly, and under what level of contact because at that stage the government has withdrawn and the private actors are allowed to decide for themselves what is an acceptable level of risk. The groups may refuse to restart or adopt protocols that are often stricter than what is required by the public health authorities because legal liability is a function of the reasonable standard of care. That standard is about what is reasonable to avoid harm to an individual, whereas the public health standard is about what is necessary to avoid harm to the community more generally. The former is often high than the latter, although there are ways to reduce what is the reasonable standard of care such as broad governmental grants of immunity that effectively shift the burden to the participant or parent to make the decision. Waivers are an attempt to shift that burden privately by contract, although courts will scrutinize them to make sure that they were granted voluntarily and with full information, which is usually where they fail.

Bottom line - we're still at Stage 1, where the effect on kids is less relevant than whether they can be asymptomatic carriers. The effect on kids comes into play in Stage 2, which is why you could see governments open up, while clubs still have difficulty fully resuming full play. Only at Stage 2 is it relevant that a parent is willing to take the risk for their kid, since they may be willing to sign the most ironclad waiver available (although insurance companies and facility owners have to factor in the risk that the waiver won't hold up in court even if you think now that you will sign away all of your rights forever). Assumption of risk is irrelevant in Stage 1.

Well written.

I'm a moderatly cautious person as a individual but more conservative with family members for example and we have two in the extended one who are immune deficient and getting something like this could be deadly for them. So while I consider for myself I have to think about others also at the same time.

When there are so many unknowns normally the risks are higher and this seems to be the case now.

I asked my remaining player if was important to jump back into a tournament or play quickly and he just laughed and said what's the rush? Would like to get back to team training and some travel he had planned but doesn't consider playing a summer tourney on a quick turnaround something he's all that interested in.

Might not be typical as he's played soo many games, tournaments and has plenty of hardware and jackets but normally he would say what about xyz cup in some other town but not this time so I assume he's not in a big rush to get back to full play without a proper preseason.

 

[Ellejustus]

To all my smart friends out there in the land of oz. Some on here preach safety first and I respect that position. Some say, "Please God, no soccer because of this and that and this." If it's true and no soccer for anyone, then no beach either. No bars!!! No water parks!!! No Disneyland. Why soccer getting attacked? Everyone can;t shop either. No Vegas, no nothing. Stay home until the cost is clear. LBPD can block coast hwy both directions and the canyon to keep everyone out. Do you know how many people came to the beaches in socal with the Corona? Lets the kids play and adults live stream soccer this summer. Stay home if you're afraid. The dumb dumb that says this and that all because this could happen is full of you know what and has other motives for his or her position. I think it's because they got left out of the ECNL party and want to cause problems because of jealously. These people don;t care about my dd or my well being, trust me. Soccer is way saver for my dd then dropping her off at a beach that everyone flocks to because it's 100 in the IE. Everyone from every where is going to the beach yet no one can play soccer because? Here we go again and round we go no one knows....lol!!! Some of you are so obvious what your fighting for. Truly sad!!! When surf cup starts, you can stand out with your signs and protest or sit this one out. BTW, if Surf Cup was in LA, forget about it. Soccer is essential for my kids well being. I can live without but my kid loves it and it helps her. So sad, take fun away from the kids all because of fear. No soccer, no beach!!!!!

 

[lafalafa]

I'm normally glass half full guy, but your more optimistic in this case than I am. I haven't seen any real legal basis for Newsom's decisions, they're at his own will and arbritary in many cases. That's why this situation is so frustrating. SD County asked for 12 person training and was only approved for one on one training (1 trainer and 1 player).

From a safety standpoint, is sitting down for a meal at a restaurant any safer that having 12 kids outside kicking a ball around. There is zero scientific basis for it and I would happily dine in at this point and would welcome with no hesitation for my kid to begin training. Let's be honest, most kids I know are already hanging out with other kids, including mine under certain circumstances. My spouse and I decide what's best for our kids, not the government without some valid basis.

The good news is the Surf Cup is hosted in San Diego County and not LA County.

Yeah feel the same way mostly and I specifically asked our local field office representative about the kids summer sports programs at schools and leagues and was told it has to do with group gatherings outside the immediate family. When that order is lifted than those kind of activities will resume and places will permit that again at those facilities. 1 on 1 training is ok in some counties now so there that at least for now.

 

[gkmom]

To all my smart friends out there in the land of oz. Some on here preach safety first and I respect that position. Some say, "Please God, no soccer because of this and that and this." If it's true and no soccer for anyone, then no beach either. No bars!!! No water parks!!! No Disneyland. Why soccer getting attacked? Everyone can;t shop either. No Vegas, no nothing. Stay home until the cost is clear. LBPD can block coast hwy both directions and the canyon to keep everyone out. Do you know how many people came to the beaches in socal with the Corona? Lets the kids play and adults live stream soccer this summer. Stay home if you're afraid. The dumb dumb that says this and that all because this could happen is full of you know what and has other motives for his or her position. I think it's because they got left out of the ECNL party and want to cause problems because of jealously. These people don;t care about my dd or my well being, trust me. Soccer is way saver for my dd then dropping her off at a beach that everyone flocks to because it's 100 in the IE. Everyone from every where is going to the beach yet no one can play soccer because? Here we go again and round we go no one knows....lol!!! Some of you are so obvious what your fighting for. Truly sad!!! When surf cup starts, you can stand out with your signs and protest or sit this one out. BTW, if Surf Cup was in LA, forget about it. Soccer is essential for my kids well being. I can live without but my kid loves it and it helps her. So sad, take fun away from the kids all because of fear. No soccer, no beach!!!!!

I think there is a misconception on here that some are saying there should absolutely be no soccer period. I think it's more accurate to say they are looking at the reality of it being approved so quickly by the government, getting permits, insurance approved, etc. I think it's fair to say everyone understands you have the choice to not send your kid, they are just looking at it from a logistical standpoint. I believe everyone here would love to see soccer start as soon as possible. Some just have different perspectives than others, which is fair. I think we should all understand we have different opinions, and everyone has a right to their own

 

[Emperador]

The last thing you want to do is post this on a public board. No one under 18 has died but they are 100% capable of transmitting the virus to those in the 80% group.
[/QUOTE
Everyone has an opinion
We never stopped, I have contact with many different people every day in my line of work, meetings, been in many places with positive tested people.
Known a few that got sick and are working again.
This thing is way over blown
I’m in the front lines making sure you have food, electricity, internet, sanitizer and many other things that keep you safe and living your confortable life.
CalSouth has to follow the guidelines of the State government, we should see authorized training in early June, reduced groups.

In other words, you cheat.

Does your insurance know? If a kid gets hurt, will the insurance company cover it?

sure, you can call it whatever you want.
I don’t worry about that.

 

[Emperador]

The last thing you want to do is post this on a public board. No one under 18 has died but they are 100% capable of transmitting the virus to those in the 80% group.

I’m not worried.
I come in contact with lots of people everyday, part of my job.
A few of them have been infected and are back to work.
80% is over blown.

 

[Emperador]

Way to be a role model for children. Ethics are important. I guess the 15 year old, 14 year old and 11 year old players weren't motivated enough to stay in shape, keep skills up and practice on their own. Sad commentary on our youth today.

Everyone is different
We do what we choose to live our lives.
I’m on the front lines, making sure there is Food at the places you buying from, clothes, gas, Electricity and many other things.
But you are entitled to your opinion just like anyone else.

 

[Ellejustus]

I think there is a misconception on here that some are saying there should absolutely be no soccer period. I think it's more accurate to say they are looking at the reality of it being approved so quickly by the government, getting permits, insurance approved, etc. I think it's fair to say everyone understands you have the choice to not send your kid, they are just looking at it from a logistical standpoint. I believe everyone here would love to see soccer start as soon as possible. Some just have different perspectives than others, which is fair. I think we should all understand we have different opinions, and everyone has a right to their own

I agree about "each to his or her own" and I really understand the fear people have. For the top top players, they need to play. Parents don;t need to be there early on. It seems like when folks talk about Surf Cup or SilverLakes there talking about the old format and all the crowds. No NO NO No!!!! No jump houses, No this and No that. Just soccer. Pay more for just a real competitive soccer tournament ((No showcase)). That should be easy to do by August. Too many people who got left out of ECNL come on here complaining and that is lame. Stay home and stay safe. Let the other top top players and risk takers take a chance like they always do. My dd plays her ass off ((when the game matters)) and can die or risk serious injury every-time I watch her play. She plays with Ganas and when one plays all out, they can go out and get hurt or die!!! I'm 100% more afraid of her tearing her ACL then catching the Corona and sneezing it unto some soul who will then pass it unto an older person and they die because my dd risked playing soccer with other 15 and 16 year olds. What kind of quilt trip is that for? Is this for real? Whatever!!! I will obey my health officials no matter what they say. No cheating. However, I can and will question decisions being made......

 

[SoccerGuru]

My kid loved Surf last year. Had a great time. I am well aware of what can go right.

How does it help if I skip it? You guys still hold your tournaments. 23 are fine. 2 have outbreaks. We still get the headlines. And, in an abundance of caution, everyone’s season gets cancelled. My daughter loses her season because someone else wanted to hold an event with 10,000 people.

Normally, I agree with “you do your thing, I do mine.“. It just doesn’t work for infectious disease.

Do you keep your kid home from school if you hear some kid threw up in class? Do you keep them home if you find out a kid had the flu the day before and didn't come to school the next day? That is the equivalent of what you just said. I see how you are trying to throw worst case scenarios out there and scare people but you do it only to fit your narrative. The truth of the matter is, is it possible that some might get the virus? Yes. Will most of them even know? No. Will it affect their life in any way? No. Should anyone over the age of 65 be at this tournament? No. Seems pretty clear cut that the risk is low. But, everything has risk and if you want to live your life hiding from it, I will respect what you decide and I won't judge you but I certainly won't follow you.

 

[JumboJack]

Either we open now or we wait for a vaccine. What is the point of waiting another week or two or three? To flatten the curve? We all know that was an absolute load of crap. So if it's not safe now it won't be until there is a vaccine (or cure/treatment), right? I don't think anyone is thinking that the virus is just going to go away. We are not going to get heard immunity with everyone hiding under their beds.