My idea honour of queen one last time.

[Van der MoodHoover]

12 hours ago, jimtastic56 said:

Sky are saying that our game at Lincoln will go ahead on Tuesday. They are also saying that a State funeral will be a massive drain on resources (Police etc). Therefore matches probably won’t go ahead on that day.

Funeral on a Monday is about as least disruption to other planned events as possible. 

[Comrade 86]

9 hours ago, Chellaston Ram said:

I thought thread was that people are moaning about matches being cancelled. What point am I missing?

What haven't you missed might be a more appropriate question... ?

 

[LERam]

On 09/09/2022 at 08:53, jimtastic56 said:

More than twice the number of Rams fans have voted not to call off Saturday’s game. It seems like showing Respect is a thing of the past. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and perhaps an  “Away day bender”  is more important.

Not a royalist either but it does seem many are unhappy at being inconvenienced...

Personally I think any formal sporting/entertainment occasions should have been cancelled. 

The Queen has died, this is a huge event in history.

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, LERam said:

Not a royalist either but it does seem many are unhappy at being inconvenienced...

Personally I think any formal sporting/entertainment occasions should have been cancelled. 

The Queen has died, this is a huge event in history.

What about theatres, pubs, clubs, gigs, businesses, restaurants, supermarkets, doctors, trains, airports?

Wouldn't a better mark of respect been everything shut down one on day, ie the day of the funeral? This piecemeal approach seems pretty meaningless, especially after after years of planning.

Sorry little Jimmy, your under 9s football match vs the next town is off as a mark of respect for the Queen. I'm off for a day of beers at the cricket/golf!

[ram59]

The trouble is, for every view on the subject, there is someone with the opposite view. The haphazard approach seems to appear ill thought out, but if the Monarchy or government demanded a total shutdown, there also be an outcry because we were being told what to do by the state. Different organisations have been given the freedom to show respect in a way that they feel appropiate and/or means minimal disruption to them.

Whatever arrangements are made, some people will or have been inconvenienced, but is this too high a price to pay for such an epic event, I don't think so. People suffer the same inconveniences regularly because of weather, strikes, accidents, etc amongst many other reasons.

[angieram]

6 minutes ago, ram59 said:

The trouble is, for every view on the subject, there is someone with the opposite view. The haphazard approach seems to appear ill thought out, but if the Monarchy or government demanded a total shutdown, there also be an outcry because we were being told what to do by the state. Different organisations have been given the freedom to show respect in a way that they feel appropiate and/or means minimal disruption to them.

Whatever arrangements are made, some people will or have been inconvenienced, but is this too high a price to pay for such an epic event, I don't think so. People suffer the same inconveniences regularly because of weather, strikes, accidents, etc amongst many other reasons.

Who would have been inconvenienced by matches being played this weekend? Resources were available and preparations had been made. In fact games not going ahead meant fans were inconvenienced and out of pocket in a lot of cases. Clubs were out of pocket, especially with regards to catering preparations and altering travel and accommodation plans. They will also be majorly inconvenienced by having to fit them in at a later date in an already incredibly busy season.

I don't think matches will go ahead next weekend because forces will be unable to provide policing  but clubs and fans will have greater notice - and awareness of this. 

I think there is some confusion here between inconvenience and disrespectfulness and I hope all those who feel that football should have been paused have been personally forgoing all other forms of entertainment and writing to express their disappointment to other sports, the hospitality industry and theatres, TV and concert venues. 

I bet Rick Parry and his mates haven't been doing any such thing! 

[ram59]

1 hour ago, angieram said:

Who would have been inconvenienced by matches being played this weekend? Resources were available and preparations had been made. In fact games not going ahead meant fans were inconvenienced and out of pocket in a lot of cases. Clubs were out of pocket, especially with regards to catering preparations and altering travel and accommodation plans. They will also be majorly inconvenienced by having to fit them in at a later date in an already incredibly busy season.

I don't think matches will go ahead next weekend because forces will be unable to provide policing  but clubs and fans will have greater notice - and awareness of this. 

I think there is some confusion here between inconvenience and disrespectfulness and I hope all those who feel that football should have been paused have been personally forgoing all other forms of entertainment and writing to express their disappointment to other sports, the hospitality industry and theatres, TV and concert venues. 

I bet Rick Parry and his mates haven't been doing any such thing! 

I stand corrected there, probably not put across correctly. There will be people who felt strongly about the games being called off, but if they'd gone ahead would have had to make their own decisions whether to sacrifice monies paid out, but also people involved in putting on the games but wanting to properly mourn would also have been affected, maybe inconvenienced was the wrong word.

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

1 hour ago, angieram said:

Who would have been inconvenienced by matches being played this weekend? Resources were available and preparations had been made. In fact games not going ahead meant fans were inconvenienced and out of pocket in a lot of cases. Clubs were out of pocket, especially with regards to catering preparations and altering travel and accommodation plans. They will also be majorly inconvenienced by having to fit them in at a later date in an already incredibly busy season.

I don't think matches will go ahead next weekend because forces will be unable to provide policing  but clubs and fans will have greater notice - and awareness of this. 

I think there is some confusion here between inconvenience and disrespectfulness and I hope all those who feel that football should have been paused have been personally forgoing all other forms of entertainment and writing to express their disappointment to other sports, the hospitality industry and theatres, TV and concert venues. 

I bet Rick Parry and his mates haven't been doing any such thing! 

The Met Police have said they should have the resource to manage games next weekend. 

[angieram]

1 hour ago, Bald Eagle's Barmy Army said:

The Met Police have said they should have the resource to manage games next weekend. 

It's interesting they are already working out how to help out as much as they can. Anyone who has seen any of the footage of the convoy from Balmoral to Edinburgh today can see the huge logistical police operation involved. I would have no problem if they did call off matches next weekend,  given the scale of a state funeral. 

The police didn't call off the games this weekend,  the FA and EFL did. 

[B4ev6is]

23 minutes ago, angieram said:

It's interesting they are already working out how to help out as much as they can. Anyone who has seen any of the footage of the convoy from Balmoral to Edinburgh today can see the huge logistical police operation involved. I would have no problem if they did call off matches next weekend,  given the scale of a state funeral. 

The police didn't call off the games this weekend,  the FA and EFL did. 

The met have said they have enough police to cope with sporting events but still happened.

Horse racing happened rubray happen golf happened so why not football.

[angieram]

2 hours ago, ram59 said:

I stand corrected there, probably not put across correctly. There will be people who felt strongly about the games being called off, but if they'd gone ahead would have had to make their own decisions whether to sacrifice monies paid out, but also people involved in putting on the games but wanting to properly mourn would also have been affected, maybe inconvenienced was the wrong word.

Didn't mean to sound like I was correcting you, sorry! It's a really personal thing, just trying to work my was through it. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

Simple question, why should I be impacted in any way or forced to pay any respects to an institution I believe should be abolished?

No sensible country has any need for a monarchy, you might as well make the tooth fairy the head of state for all the sense it makes.

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Simple question, why should I be impacted in any way or forced to pay any respects to an institution I believe should be abolished?

No sensible country has any need for a monarchy, you might as well make the tooth fairy the head of state for all the sense it makes.

We are a society together, you prefer anarchy?

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

4 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Simple question, why should I be impacted in any way or forced to pay any respects to an institution I believe should be abolished?

No sensible country has any need for a monarchy, you might as well make the tooth fairy the head of state for all the sense it makes.

I realise this sounds quite blunt, but I stand by it. I've served in the armed forces, taken the imaginary oaths to protect the monarchy etc.

My service was for my own career and to benefit the country as a whole, not for a monarch.

It's 2022, not 1022.

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

We are a society together, you prefer anarchy?

Society has no use for a monarchy. We have a democratically elected government. 

Remove the monarchy from the equation in the UK and you do not end up with anarchy.

[RoyMac5]

7 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Society has no use for a monarchy. We have a democratically elected government. 

Remove the monarchy from the equation in the UK and you do not end up with anarchy.

Lol. That's not what our society says.

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

9 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lol. That's not what our society says.

Just because it's how things have always been does not mean it's how things should always be.

I suspect a lot of attitudes will change now Elizabeth has passed away. The mechanisms that govern the UK are in desperate need of modernisation. Removing any Royal influence over them is one of the first steps.

Edited September 11, 2022 by JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta

[ariotofmyown]

10 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lol. That's not what our society says.

What our society says it that we are perfectly fine with William now being the proud owner of 1 billion worth of property and land. 

If we really must keep the royals, can't we just get them to hand over a lot of their vast wealth to the country. How many castles and huge houses do they need?

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, ariotofmyown said:

What our society says it that we are perfectly fine with William now being the proud owner of 1 billion worth of property and land. 

If we really must keep the royals, can't we just get them to hand over a lot of their vast wealth to the country. How many castles and huge houses do they need?

How you going to do that then and where do you stop?

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Just because it's how things have always been does not mean it's how things should always be.

I suspect a lot of attitudes will change now Elizabeth has passed away. The mechanisms that govern the UK are in desperate need of modernisation. Removing any Royal influence over them is one of the first steps.

Much easier than dealing with our democracy, which would be more representative?