A statement from National League South Slough Town asks whether it is morally right to expect clubs to keep playing given the position the country finds itself in.
This from Slough Town:
'Following the Prime Minister’s announcement of another national lockdown
on Monday, the vastly different COVID-19 landscape is further
highlighted.
Two weeks ago, we raised our concerns about player safety with The
National League and the ensuing weeks with ever-increasing infection
rates, hospitalisations and deaths have done nothing to reduce those
fears.
Back in March there was no consideration of football continuing.
September saw an improving position with lower infection rates and a
more hopeful future. Now however, cases in Slough are increasing at an
alarming rate and the current rate is 993 cases per 100,000 people in
the latest week (25-31 December). This has doubled in two weeks with the
onset of the new strain of the virus.
Whilst we can apply our protocols rigidly, encourage players to take
care in their everyday lives and clean the facility rigorously, we now
feel that this is insufficient to protect our players, staff and
volunteers.
It is important to note that teams in The National League differ from
those in the EFL; for one, many of our players and playing staff have
jobs outside of their footballing roles and so their potential for
exposure is higher. National League clubs are not tested to the current
standards set by the EFL, and the costs are prohibitive to test to this
standard for teams in our league.
Whilst much of the nation works from home, frontline key workers
continue to fulfil their essential roles. Footballers, of course, cannot
work from home. Now is the time once again where the footballing world
must ask itself whether it can justify putting its people at risk. Is
football essential?
We have a duty of care to our players and managers, and that
responsibility sits with the clubs as employers and not with The
National League, The FA or the Government.
We have in the last few weeks ramped up our protocols to the verge of
obsessiveness, but we are feeling increasingly uncomfortable in asking
our players to take what can only be seen as unnecessary risks. Our
players have also expressed their concerns both for themselves and their
families. Whilst the Government may say that there is no evidence to
suggest that the virus spreads through football, there is no evidence to
suggest that it does not. The stipulation that individuals only meet
one other person outdoors counters that argument in our view.
In essence, we are asking The National League Board to consider whether
it is morally right to expect clubs to keep playing given the position
the country finds itself in.
We appreciate the commercial issues and the impact of disruption on the
higher leagues. We will fulfil our fixtures but we will do so under
duress. We are simply asking The National League to consider the bigger
picture with regard to the risk to life and acknowledge that right now,
the health and safety of the players and their families is more
important than football.
To be clear, we are not asking for the season to end, but simply to be
suspended temporarily so that all parties have time to reflect, plan but
more importantly to put people first. We understand that cynics may
argue that we are suggesting this because our position in the league is
not where we would want it to be and that we are ‘playing for time’, but
to those people we say this: Slough Town Football Club puts the safety
of its players and staff above all things. This is not a revolutionary
proposal - it would merely bring The National League in line with the
rest of the country.'