First High School game on my board is August 11. That's 5 weeks. Games really start in earnest on August 15. I haven't seen schedules for youth and adult amateur leagues just yet. It won't surprise me, given the direction of the #cases/day curve, that the state decides to move Boys HS to the spring (which is when the girls play HS soccer round these parts), which will be a logistical challenge (twice as many games with the same number of referees, same number of fields. And not sure about coaches that currently coach both teams).
Heck, the earliest I could have had games is 7/15 (I ended up getting assigned on the 22nd). HS (which I don’t do) has released a restart plan, youth association has released one that allowed us games on June 26. I did a friendly between 2 HS teams organized by the players on the 27th, it was so fun to get back out there. But, yes, I absolutely think that fall sports in many leagues, divisions, and organizations, will return. It will be different, but they will return.
I have D1 NCAA games In August - November. Way lower volume than usual (I think their schedules have been trimmed) and they aren’t public yet. Officials are mostly local (keep costs down), no 4ths are being utilized, and I don’t think they’re flying officials (the conferences). So way more locals doing middles (whooo hoooo). It’ll be interesting Bc most colleges I believe are going to be all online..... so idk how that’s going to work out.
I am planning for refereeing club soccer this fall and doing radio play by play for high school football. Better to have the preparation and not need it than to need it and not have it.
Gracious I hope so. if you’re 24 years old or younger, Covid represents less than 1% of all causes deaths. if you are 10-19, the odds of dying if you get COVID is 0.0003%. https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863 Adult policy makers keeping youth from doing their activities, whether it be school or sports or whatever, IMO is selfishness. If you don’t want it, take precautions. But to say a youth game refereed by young adults should not happen because it’s dangerous to them overstates the danger of covid 19.
You’re missing the point. Nobody (at the moment) is considerably worried about a kid dying from COVID. But what happens if the virus gets spread to anybody at risk? Besides, the number of 13-24 year olds who are doing the higher level youth games has got to be low. (I use 13 for minimum USSF age and 24 as your number) So we MAYBE have the teenagers come back and do some low level games (not guaranteed). Older referees still need to cover the higher level games. If someone had the average age of a USSF soccer referee, I would love to hear it. There aren’t nearly enough experienced teenage referees to cover all games of kids 10-24, which is club leagues, Rec, HS, college, etc. Heck, how many teenagers are CERTIFIED HS refs? I can bet the number is incredibly low. So a 14 year old does a U12 game, catches COVID for whatever reason. They bring it home to their parents, who give it to their friends at a gathering. The kid hangs out with some friends, gives it to them, then one friend gives it to their visiting grandpa. And that is how a virus spreads. What if that kid goes to the supermarket? The worry is over who they are passing it to. And do you really expect a teenager to quarantine for 2 weeks after getting $30 for a U11 line? Or get tested every day like the pro’s do? Just ignore their entire social and family life for 2 weeks after one u-littles game? We just had 2 professional sports teams pull out of a return to play because they couldn’t protect their players, but you’re expecting teenagers to protect themselves? And what happens during Boys HS season? The girls ref? How many female teenage HS refs are there in the whole country? I highly doubt it even breaks 60. And if you tell all of the “at risk” old referees to stay home, how many of them come back ever? Or how many just say, “well, I guess this is it” and hang up the whistle? You are expecting only referees who are 13-24 to cover anything from U8 to college and I can’t understand how you see that as a realistic possibility. And we don’t even know the long-term effects yet. So with even just somebody getting it and not passing it to anybody, which almost certainly won’t happen, there still could be trouble in the future. And are all coaches now 24 and under too? So I understand why organizations and/or schools are apprehensive. You should have seen the legal document my state youth association made me sign. If you looked up “legal buzzwords” I’m pretty sure every word you find could be read in this document. It was airtight. I’m not saying sports should never return, but I do think you’re being shortsighted and incredibly dismissive of the global pandemic going on right now.
Telling someone over 40 that they CAN'T ref while others under 40 can - that's a lawsuit just waiting to happen for age discrimination. Even if so-called best interests of the ref are considered. But the larger point is what was brought up above - these young athletes have families and friends, and the virus could spread among them. So the question is not the chances of youth athletes catching the virus and how serious it would be to them. It's whether the chances of them catching the virus and passing it on is too high. We're seeing transmission through young adults at bars, beaches, etc. now. And in some cases, transmission from those young adults to younger pre-adults. I'm not saying sports can't be played safely. I'm saying we don't know. And seeing rates going up means that uncertainty now is even higher.
I think something that was glazed over a bit here as well is that the youth players are not the ones at risk. However, their parents and loved ones on the sidelines are at risk. How are you going to have youth sports without crowds for minors? Are the parents going to drop them off and then watch from the parking lot? do the crowds social distance and have set pods? That could potentially work in games that have stadiums and bleachers but most of the games we do here on this forum are on grass fields at parks. Im not even getting into the nightmare of sanitizing the turf for those games played on turf!!! These logistical nightmares are breeding grounds for spreading more of the virus.
I say without irony that I truly appreciate these thoughts and the mindfulness for public safety - I would expect no less from my fellow referees. But really you are making my point for me. We have a social responsibility to each other to do our best to avoid endangering the vulnerable. But the real responsibility for safety is individual- you cannot legislate people's own risk taking (seatbelts aside, innumerable dangerous habits and hobbies are not restricted by the law). But lawmakers, often in higher risk groups, dictate to the young that they MUST do things to protect those at high risk when they don't share that risk. Is it a surprise that this rings hollow for so many? Social distancing was the initial strategem. It is a blunt, unnuanced broad message based on limited knowledge and urgency. It was largely successful in flattening the curve (new york being a gross exception). What is not broadly understood is that flattening the curve doesn't make the area under the curve any smaller- the number of cases will ultimately be the same, just spread over time rather than the overwhelming wave. This is important because excess deaths occur when critical care resources become exhausted. COVID will penetrate every corner of the country and the estimates that 30-40% of the population will be affected will be borne out. Now we know more. A lot more. And yet the message is still the same, blunt and unnuanced. We cannot educate our youth because we are unwilling to quarantine those at risk, by decision makers who ultimately are self serving. Remember H1N1? Far more dangerous to the young person than Covid. What restrictions were made then? Schools didn't close, sports weren't cancelled. Why not? Because those making decisions were not at risk. The news reports cases of covid among athletes as though it's a surprise or alarm- face value reasoning for cancelling, right? - FCD stepped out of MLS is back for example. But those cases are not a surprise nor a cause for alarm- they were inevitable, noteworthy mostly because of the exaggerated and useless response of avoidance. So as a person who is at medium risk (52 and healthy) who is an employer and caregiver who must deal with the financial and health consequences of COVID every day, father, husband, and son of elderly parents, I say that the responsible person should do what he/she can to reduce risks to the vulnerable, but also that those at risk should bear the disproportionate burden of their own protection, not the other way around.
And death rates get all the attention, but they're far from the whole story. This sounds to me like a disease I would prefer not to get even if my odds of surviving it are good. Like, if I should happen to get shot, I hope I survive it, but on balance I'd much rather not get shot in the first place.
This thread is clearly starting to veer towards political discussions and the effectiveness and validity of public policy to combat covid-19 and the seriousness of Covid-19. Mods please take a look.
Seatbelt laws -- and helmet laws, and traffic and vehicle laws more generally -- are not a completely terrible analogy. Think how much legislation and regulation and enforcement goes into that. In 2018 there were 36,560 traffic deaths in the US (or so says Wikipedia). "As of July 6, 2020, there have been over 129,900 deaths related to COVID-19 in the United States. There have been over 32,200 deaths in the state of New York ..." (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1103688/coronavirus-covid19-deaths-us-by-state/)
We are resuming all leagues (youth) this weekend. I have opted out for the time being. I want to find out how it’s going before jumping back in considering my area was fairly hard hit. And, have I mentioned I’m old? Here are a few tips sent out by by our SRC. Pretty easy to follow. Social distance when you can. Wear your mask when you are arriving and departing the field for your assignment. Don’t share your flags. Bring sanitizer. Wear a mask if you want while refereeing. No helping players up, no touching of players at all, no handshakes, hi fives, fist bumps. Social distance coin flip. Show a card from distance. Use coaches more liberally to break up a mass confrontation. Mostly, use common sense.
I only worry about my state. I hear that other states have big numbers, etc., but the disparities between states are huge, for a lot of reasons. Despite all of the calls for a 'national policy' on dealing with Covid-19, the governors all seem quite confident that they are making the right decisions for their state, based on the situation in their state. I get an e-mail from the state health department every day about the previous day's activity. Deaths: Virtually all of the deaths in our state are people over the age of 60, and half are people over the age of 80. 98% are people with pre-existing health problems. (not a rough guess statistic.) We have had one person under the age of 40 die, and they were one of those with pre-existing health problems. The chances of someone dying from Covid-19 in my state are 5 in 100,000, not adjusted for the clearly higher risk to those with pre-existing health conditions. At this point, it is very rare that there is a death from Covid-19 in our major metropolitan area. I don't remember the last day that one was reported. To put the risk of death in another term, I am twice as likely to die in a car accident than I am to die of Covid-19, again, unadjusted for pre-existing health conditions (I have none) or for not driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Among those who have been diagnosed with Covid-19 or are presumed to have had Covid-19, the death rate is 2%. I still pray for those who have died and I am surprised at how happy I am on the the days I read that there were no new deaths. As far as hospitalizations are concerned, which, I think, is a better indicator of health problems from Covid-19, 00.027% of the people in our state have been hospitalized due to Covid-19. Again, that's heavily weighted towards people who have pre-existing health problems. As i understand it, the FDA has determined that there has been no transmission by food or food packaging. The CDC has determined that there is virtually no chance of transmission by contact with surfaces. The state health authority says that after 30 days of daily protest marches/riots, with a large number of marchers/rioters not wearing masks, or at least not the kind that cover the nose and mouth, they have seen no increase in Covid-19 diagnoses amongst the marchers. The governor has only started requiring masks in public indoor settings. That tells me that there does not appear to be a material risk outdoors. In the words of Admiral Grace Hopper, "You can have controls. You can never have security." Yes, there are risks from Covid-19. Are people willing to accept that risk, just like they accept the risk of a car accident every time they drive? Some will, some will not. John Stuart Mill proposed that decisions should be made on the basis of the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Utilitarianism, however, foundered over how that balance could be determined. That is the fundamental problem with the response to Covid-19. It does no good to deny or exaggerate the risks or the pains and costs of various restrictions to the public as a whole.
I am trying really hard to not get into political arguments on here, but between your multiple posts cherry-picking numbers to support your political beliefs, I'm just grateful you're not the Oregon SRC anymore.
UPSL has started back up. I did a Saturday night AR followed by a Sunday morning CTR opening weekend (June 20/21). I have offered my services for a youth tournament late in August, but I made that offer back before the cases exploded in Texas. After that I am seriously considering 'retiring' from youth soccer that isn't the new MLS development league. I'd already been cutting youth games back to make sure I was doing the adult games I need to work to be a better referee. I will say that a recent study on the effects of UV rays on the virus has settled my concerns but I'm still not touching anyone.
Let’s at least put some Of this in perspective. Oregon is one of the least diverse states in the country with minority populations well below national averages. And, we do know that both Black and Hispanic communities Have been hit with disproportionate effect. Also, Oregon has also tested far less. But, their incidence of Covid (testing or not) is still lower. In recent times, we have gotten much better at treating the disease, which has lowered the death rate. Also, due to compliance, those in riskier age/health groups have taken many more precautions than in the earlier days when it was going thru my county like a forest fire. At my age, I am of the belief That taking precautions is not that big Of a problem. I have had life threatening illnesses twice in my life. Both almost killed me. Not going to risk a third. (BTW, I have been plagued with the random capitalization virus on this forum lately. Don’t know if there is a vaccine.)
> I am trying really hard to not get into political arguments on here, > I'm just grateful you're not the Oregon SRC anymore.[ Come on. Anyway, @Rufusabc have fun. I am surprised a coin flip is still being performed. Why not, for the time being, a quick number game to minimize close-quarters contact.
Rufusabc makes some good points. The time that those who have been hospitalized were in the hospital has come down, supporting his statement about becoming better at treating the disease. Those in riskier health groups who live in assisted living, skilled nursing facility, etc. have largely been confined to their rooms for months now. The quality of the site operator is reflected in the number of cases, hospitalizations and deaths. The bell curve describes the quality of care. We'd all like to be at the upper end of the curve. The operators have a strong incentive, however, to get this stuff under control. If you can't show a clean bill of health, nobody is going to move in and otherwise nature slowly reduces the number of residents, from Covid-19 or other natural causes. It's like the saying, "Be nice to your kids. They're going to pick out your nursing home.' This part is not opinion, since I own a small part of two assisted living facilities, one in Oregon one in Washington. I compared Oregon's minority population numbers to the national averages, using Census Bureau numbers. Oregon is 1.8% Black, compared to a national average of 12.3%. There are eight states with a smaller percentage of Blacks. 4.3% of the diagnosed cases in the state are people identified as Black, according to the Oregon Health Authority. Oregon is 13.1% Hispanic, compared to a national average of 18.1%. 38 states have a lower percentage of Hispanics than Oregon does. 36.7% of Oregon's cases are Hispanic. Based on OHA reports, this is pumped up by a large number of cases at meat packing plants in the eastern part of the state. (Umatilla County, which has 7.7% of all Covid-19 cases in the state, but only 2.6% of the deaths.) Asians make up 4.3% of the state's population, but only 2.2% of the cases. I don't think there is anything "political" about anything I have said here. I have not mentioned any politician or political party, favorably or unfavorably, or advocated any government action or non-action. As Joe Friday said, "Just the facts, ma'am."
I don't know that we have the data yet to determine how much of the shorter hospital stays are attributable to better care and how much to the fact that more younger people are getting sick now, who are better able to fight off the virus. A lot of numbers may still mean different things--part of the nature of science is that it takes time to reach a high confidence level, but that doesn't fit the 24-7 news cycle, especially during something like a pandemic. With what we know, reasonable minds are going to differ on what protections are necessary and what is overkill. And then we have unreasonable minds in the mix, too, . . . Based on what I think I know, I'd be a lot more comfortable outdoors on a soccer field than inside on a basketball court or volleyball court. But I live in a county that is spiking, so if things were to start up today (which they won't), I wouldn't be ready to get on the soccer field. If I lived elsewhere, I might.
The Northwest Athletic Conference - which covers the community colleges in Washington/Oregon/Idaho/British Columbia - announced today that all Fall sports (except cross country and golf) are postponed until Spring. I assume that with the Ivy League at the top and NWAC at the... not top, it's just a (short) matter of time until the rest fill in. (And yes, I know the Ivy League isn't the top of the sports world - but it is often a bellwether for decision making.)
Maybe. But I believe the Big 10 announcement that they would have conference-only play came after the Ivy announcement. I think the Ivy league sees sports as less important than many colleges, so I think many other conferences are going to try harder to keep their sports. But without the same ability to create bubbles as the pro sports are (mostly) using, I think they are going to have a tough time making it work. There is a striking difference between what many colleges are doing with students coming back to campus (or not) and what they are doing with athletes.
For soccer I'd be curious what the Pac-12, ACC, BigWest, Big10 and AAC end up doing. I think those conferences sorta dictate the soccer realm.
For men’s soccer sure but for women the power five (acc, big 10, big 12, pac 12, sec) are biggest players, and for the sake of the economic engine that is college football, I would expect them to act in lockstep. The SEC had earlier declared there will be at least be conference play in football, and the players have been present for several weeks. Now the sec is meeting today to figure it out but even football Is on the table for shelving til spring. crazy times.