David

Pretty much.

Well said.

That's the best way to approach it. Still, I think I'll wait a few years once it's available and see what the fallout is. It'll likely not be me or my age group (40 years old, healthy, no history of medical issues) that they try it out on first.

Well, every other vaccine has taken years to create. Be it for flu, polio, whatever. I'm no expert, but usually with something like a vaccine you're talking anything from four to six years of academic and in-lab research. Then there's three to five years of trials, including closely-monitored small-numbers human trials, then it usually takes a few years to gain regulatory approval after the process of independent scrutiny and investigation. I know "technology" and all that, but if a vaccine hits shelves within a year or so of this virus becoming "a thing" I'd have to believe that some of the above-mentioned steps have been overlooked in favour of being first to provide the world with the answer. This is like a pharmaceutical space-race of sorts. And it seems America is doing all it can to be first yet again, no matter what it takes. So yeah, I'll be giving it a wide berth. I'd rather take my chances with a virus like Covid than run the risk of being part of a live testing phase for some quickly put-together answer to the pandemic.

Not for me it isn't. I'd rather catch a virus that there's a good chance I won't even know I have than take my chances with a vaccine that has been produced quickly and without the years of testing and research usually applied.

I think I'd be more worried about any vaccine that is rushed through in a year than I would the actual virus itself, especially when you look at how long it's taken to safely develop vaccines in the past. That aside, the virus is going nowhere, so if we continue to approach it as we are we may as well forget getting back into football properly for years.

Not sure the fans of West Ham United would agree. Same fanbase, different "structure" has led to a completely different environment. Not saying that environment is the sole cause, but it certainly plays a part.

Wow, that's quite the story there. You've decided that from your (limited) knowledge of the guy that he would have been arrogant enough to believe he's a cert to start for his national team and will return with his tail between his legs as he didn't play? I don't agree.

Back with his tail between his legs? Why would you think that?

All Turnbull chat can now continue in the former player thread.

We could always just groundshare with Accies?

They were probably gutted that they missed out on the title, as players at that level want to win everything. As for winning the tenth title? I doubt they gave a fuck really. To put it into perspective, if Juventus win the Italian title this season they also win ten in a row. How many people are talking about that? If no one outside Italy cares about Juventus winning ten in a row in one of the top leagues in Europe, there's even less chance of anyone giving a fuck what happens in Scotland. My knowledge of the Forster deal isn't extensive, but I'm sure I read that the Southampton manager had a sit down with him and told him he was part of his plans for the new season. Hadn't Forster been injured for a while? I'd heard he wasn't fit before returning to Celtic, so maybe a chance to regain some fitness and give it a go at Southampton was the plan all along. Only the Scottish media really seemed to be talking up the idea of a permanent deal from what I could see. He's on about £70,000 a week down there, he'd need to be touched in the head to come up here to earn half that.

Have to believe that those trying to downplay what a move to Celtic could mean are grasping at straws a little. It's understandable, mind you. Personally, I think he'll go on to become a fantastic player for Celtic. He'll win titles, and despite what folk say, he will get some games in front of the big crowds against Europe's top clubs (not to say he'll win any of them mind, as Celtic lose more of them than anything else, but still.) Another factor is that he's still young. There's every chance he doesn't fancy uprooting his life and fucking off to some city down south where he knows no one at this stage in his life. Probably a different scenario in five years or so if and when he's maybe married with his own family. The transition will be somewhat easier then. I think he has his heart set on Celtic as the next step, and good luck to him. I've seen some people moan about the fee as well. Maybe those people need a wee reminder that if he hadn't signed an extension with us, which he had no obligation to do, and which wasn't in his own interests really, we'd be getting fuck all close to the amount mentioned now. He lived up to his side of the bargain, now we need to live up to ours. And I fully expect our board to do so.

Your vendetta against Robinson is disturbing. Honestly, did he bully you at school or something?

If anyone wants to moan about a pre-season friendly loss start a thread for it.

I was living literally right next to the Air Canada Center and could watch games live on Sportsnet. Both hockey and baseball.

Only a complete fucking moron would think I'm comparing Motherwell to Toronto. I'm more thinking about the idea that it's up to clubs and the league in general to make actually going to the football something that is more attractive than just sitting in the house with a stream on your laptop. There's a reason why people choose to go to baseball or ice hockey rather than watch it at home, and it's because they are treated to a great day or evening out. It's an experience that far surpasses watching it at home on the telly. That we have fans who'd so readily rather stay home and watch a stream than go to a game tells you a lot about the state our game is in.

This is a good point as well. For example, in Toronto every single Maple Leafs hockey game is televised live. But, the games are always full of fans. Same with most NFL games and so forth. Why aren't those fans avoiding the games and just watching on telly?

I don't think it'll really be a choice before long. Things are changing, both from a technology viewpoint, and from a "new normal" viewpoint. I don't think we'll be sitting here in a year with everything back to normal, looking back on the time that pandemic fucked with a season of football. There's a good chance we're going to see more spikes in this virus over the coming year or so, and beyond that? Who knows. We can't just keep shutting football down every time it happens, so plans will have to be made to switch things up, and I think that online streaming is the way forward in that regard. Sadly, I think the days of football as those of us of a certain vintage know it are over.

As far as youth goes, it's also the case, sadly, that the majority simply won't be good enough. For every Hastie, Turnbull and Campbell there's going to be countless others let go each season. I'm not an expert on our youth players at the moment, but I do believe that if we had anyone who was good enough and ready to come through, Robinson would be bringing them through. We'll go through periods where none of the younger players are either ready or good enough. That's just how it works. During those periods we need to find players from elsewhere.

Then you'd still be paying for a stream, so the club makes money either way.

It's now official. One year deal.

Only providing access to season ticket holders would be a huge mistake in my opinion. Imagine how many other fans are out there, both home and away, willing to pay a tenner or whatever for a stream of the game? I honestly think this is the future of football. It's taken this virus to force through changes to the rule saying 3pm kick-offs can't be shown, and now the toothpaste is out the tube I don't know if it'll revert back. It's a revenue maker that will hopefully sit alongside actual ticket money from match-going fans. I don't for a second think that a fan who is able and willing to attend in person is going to change their mind because there's a stream available. Those fans will always go to the games when they can. What this approach does is open up an option for those who can't physically make it to a game.

Not really heard all that much about this, but it's going to be "a thing" before too long with the season due to start soon. So, anyone know how its going to work? I know we had a streaming service in place already, although it was mainly geared towards overseas fans getting access to live games. Now that streaming live games will be open to domestic audiences, what's the story? I know season ticket holders are getting the games for free, but what about non-season ticket holders? Will it be something like a tenner a game? How much of the revenue does the club get? Hopefully we'll get some answers before too long.

Aye, that's something a lot of people are overlooking. We just need to hope this online streaming ticket proves to be a success, at least bringing in some form of money from non-season ticket holders.