Edinburghdon

Plot twist... It absolutely wont be

The way I read it was if it was just the 4 household rule that they broke then surely the statements saying club protocols too would be redundant, makes me believe there were separate club guidelines broken. The club also made a big song a dance about the cost of the private testing so I’d assume the results would be same day or as near as or it’d be pointless, seem to remember a video the club posted showing that too although I can’t be arsed looking for it anymore. At the end of the day it’s irrelevant how clear it is to us, it’ll have been drilled in to the players and staff so they’ve only themselves to blame really. Although there’s a decent amount of info on the SFA site on the general framework (minimal interaction between players outside games/training etc, testing, screening) even if the specifics of the club policies aren’t published. The abuse and stick they’re seemingly getting is out of order but the punishments probably aren’t (assuming the standard punishments in line with rule 24 etc are applied).

I genuinely couldn’t tell you with any certainty how it differs from a normal situation, I was mainly pointing out the club has been pretty clear in the fact they’ve not just broken the government COVID guidance but they’ve also broken the clubs protocols (and by association the SFA’s given they seem to call for protocols of a certain standard to be in place as part of the return to professional football). If I had to guess though the screening they need to go through each morning before being allowed to enter the training ground is designed to highlight if the players have been in higher risk environments or if they’ve not been social distancing outwith training etc and if that’s flagged up it’d mean isolation for the player to ensure the rest of the squad/staff aren’t exposed to risk. Likewise finding out where they’d been, with who and when is probably key in deciding how to handle any positive cases, so if they’d likely picked it up the day before without having been in contact with the squad then it’d be fairly straightforward, if they’d likely picked it up day’s previously and been training normally since (as appears to have been the case) its a more complicated situation. But like I’ve said that’s a guess based on what the clubs said about their return to training protocols previously. The club would need to publish the protocols in order to be sure. The fact we’d previously had a positive test of a player without any suggestion he broke return to training protocols shows they can differentiate between cases when the rules are followed and cases where they aren’t though when it comes to the risk of spreading to the rest of the squad. Not sure what part of my post reads like I accused the players or the club of lying about any of this, I’ve not suggested as such...but now you mention it you can probably draw your own conclusions given the club investigated, found the players to have broken protocols and the report that it was the Thursday before any of this kicked off.

The club also said they broke the return to training protocols didn’t they? Isn’t the whole reason the games were postponed because the players returned to training despite having been out and as soon as they did that there was no way of knowing if they’d passed it on to the rest of the squad/staff and therefore control of the biosecure environment they have to maintain to allow training/matches to take place was lost. I'm sure in the initial reports were that it was the Thursday before the extent of what happened became clear and everyone was sent home from training. Surely that’s the more major issue in what they’ve done as it meant the “bubble” they were working in had burst. If they’d followed the proper return to training protocol then the players involved would have isolated, the rest of the squad could have prepared for the games, it would have just been an internal matter and none of this would be happening. Reading the SFA statements they’re not being punished for going out to a pub it’s not following the rules in place, I.e the return to training protocols and the club not being able to guarantee the rest of the squad isn’t effected which given we’ve now had to have 3 of our games postponed in a season that’s already tight for free dates isn’t completely unreasonable.

Crawford has just signed for Doncaster Rovers.

We’ve been sent home from work in westhill early the last 2 days. Roads completely clear etc, it’s a joke.

Seems there’s 41 councillors to vote, not all are making a wee speech though.

It’s being reported we’ve put in a late bid too. Guess it shows how serious mcinnes is in wanting devlin if we have indeed made a bid.

There's some great quotes in there, reflects really well on both McLean and how the club have handled things.

Fantastic deal, getting cash for a player we knew would be leaving anyway, keeping a key part of our midfield and 6 months to sort out a quality replacement too. Top work from the club there! McLean has really gone about this move well and deserves some credit for being so open about his intentions. His performances have improved of late too, here's hoping that continues and he leaves with a SC winner medal

I think the point is we are severely limited in midfielders as it is, losing one of our first 11 will definitely be felt given the total lack of options to replace him within the squad. Even with his limitations its not a stretch to say getting rid of McLean without replacing him could well be the difference between 2nd and 3rd. A gaping hole in an already lightweight (almost cobbled together at times) midfield would make maintaining our position very difficult. Of course taking the £500k is a no brainer, but ONLY if he's adequately replaced straight away.

Positive, would be a 5 min walk from the house Negative, would lose the ideal place to walk the dog. On balance I reckon I'd have to start up NDPS (No Duthie Park Stadium) and fight the plans as irritatingly as NKS have.

I get that wasn’t the point you were making, it was a response to manc’s point about waiting for King links to become available. Agree with your points but There will be a point that simply waiting for something perfect to appear when the council shows no interest in assisting or being involved in a joint plan becomes infeasoble though.

If we could it would almost be a no brainier.

Is sitting tight until the driving range lease runs out in 2040 feasible? Craig group have already said they aren’t going to break it early and the council appear to be unwilling to force them to.