Arteta trying to convince players to get Covid jabs to avoid red-list row

There is a new potentially disruptive row between Premier League clubs and the Government building up ahead of the upcoming World Cup Qualifiers.

Boris is saying that anyone going to a red list country must isolate on their return, with the isolation being reduced by half (to 5 days) if the players have been double jabbed.

Considering the amount of people in the UK that are already at that stage, I am surprised to hear that many footballers are still against the idea. In fact the Telegraph reported that a THIRD of EFL players had no intention of getting jabbed.

On the Premier League, a SkySports report said last week: Newspaper reports on Friday suggest only around 35 per cent of players in the top division have received the jab, but Premier League insiders have told Sky Sports News the numbers are actually much higher than that.

Most Premier League players have had at least the first Covid vaccination, though take-up levels for the second jab have been described as “disappointing”.

Following Wednesday’s meeting of Premier League executives in central London, the clubs have now agreed to discuss the matter afresh with their own players, and encourage them to get fully vaccinated as soon as possible.

Now the problem the EPL have is that the new red-list rules will make it clear which players are jabbed and which are not, which they are trying to keep secret for some reason.

Mikel Arteta lost Granit Xhaka to Covid recently, and it was revealed that the Swiss captain was unvaccinated, but the Arsenal boss has made it clear that he wants all footballers to be persuaded to get double protected, as he said yesterday: “We have tried it in various ways, at the end the decision is by the player because they are not forced to do it. Obviously it will be extremely helpful for the clubs if the players can do that because it wouldn’t restrict their mobility and wouldn’t restrict their ability to compete with the clubs, who are responsible for paying them and looking after them, and play the majority of the games in the season with them.”

The Government is trying hard to get the message across to footballers as well. Their deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam has recorded a video that was sent to all top clubs, saying that he has seen a number of professional footballers hospitalised as a result of the virus, and that being double-vaccinated cuts your chances of serious illness or death by up to 95 per cent.

The clubs are in a sticky situation, as they can’t say “Get jabbed or get sacked” like the government has done to care workers, but when you consider the amount of travelling most players have to do, surely they need to keep themselves and the people they come into contact with as safe as possible as well?

And also, why should they expect to be exempt from government isolation rules if they refuse to get jabbed.

It’s a very sticky situation as far as I’m concerned……

27 Comments

  1. TH14 says:

    Im not surprised footballers are Covidiots, ie they think they are invincible because of their elite fitness levels. Covid has never been about the damage the virus can do to an an individual but those around them. Until the mentality changes there will be more COVID outbreaks in the PL. It blows my mind that people cant be bothered to get a second jab.

  2. SueP says:

    Difficult indeed AdPat
    We are free to make our own choices and with that freedom there often difficult decisions to be made. Footballers are no different. If they don’t get jabbed then they should quarantine. I had tears of joy and relief in my eyes after the first jab. The start of my road to freedom again. But not everyone sees it like that

    1. Admin Pat says:

      At my age, I certainly wouldn’t be rushing to take a City-Break if I wasn’t double jabbed. But that’s my choice coz I prefer to stay alive…

  3. jon fox says:

    Pat Total agreement. To my mind is shows thr simple minds and selfish nature of the majority of players who refuse the jab. Hard to respecrt selfish fools is my view.

  4. gotanidea says:

    Kroenke shouldn’t have been so lenient to his employees. There must be some clauses on those athletes’ contracts that the lawyers could use to enforce vaccinations

    Imagine if we lose all our senior CFs again and would have to rely on our noob strikers

    1. Nero says:

      Imagine the trash you typed above.. Because arsenal workers are slaves?

      Lol, either your a kid or gotnoidea as l always suspected.

      Going by laws which “humans” especially free people live by… ITS IILEGAL TO FORCE ANY ONE TO TAKE A VACCINE.. well i guess this info has no left leg, cutting in from the right side etc you wont know

  5. Lord Denning says:

    Mandatory vaccination can only be effected ie through international legislation but it would be inconsistent with most countries constitution hence null and.The policy on Mandatory vaccination is not advisable.How long will the vaccination provide immunity to the body though effective no definite answer to that from the experts. No one also knows the long term effects of these vaccines for sure from experience, hence there is a justifiable reason why some people will not want to be vaccinated it is their body.Those vaccinated are ‘safe’ what’s the issue with those who have refused to take the vaccine?

    1. Drayton says:

      Spot on, Lord Denning. What I don’t understand is why so many vaccinated ppl are worried about and hell-bent on vilifying the unvaccinated. If you’re vaccinated, you’re supposed to be protected, right? So what does it matter to you? And if you’re unvaccinated, then you’ve chosen to put yourself at a higher risk, so if you die, that was your free choice, and it doesn’t affect the vaccinated. Ugh, so tired of all the divisive topics these days…

      1. Kev82 says:

        Drayton 👍👍

      2. SueP says:

        You are largely correct I’d say, but it’s as well to remember that the more senior vaccinated age groups who are not yet ready to pop their clogs may think differently – as they along with the immunosuppressed of any age are likely to face more serious consequences if they catch it. You can still catch it even if vaccinated but usually in a weaker form. But I’d say you are wrong to assume that the vaccinated are going to automatically be ok if you pass the virus on to them.
        But it’s not for me to judge in any shape or form; it’s for the vulnerable to keep taking responsibility for themselves- which is what my husband has been doing for the last 18 months. It’s been a very long haul with only a little light at the end of the tunnel.

      3. Argooner says:

        Perhaps because vaccination programs rely on enough of a population receiving the vaccine in order to reduce transmission within a community. This hopefully limits the chances of mutations emerging and protects people who are unable to receive the vaccination due to medical reasons, age etc. Getting vaccinated is a social responsibility so those who do not do so are basically saying that their health is more important than those who do choose to get vaccinated for the good of others.

    2. Kev82 says:

      Well said Lord Denning 👍👍

  6. Shortboygooner says:

    Can’t stand posts like this. This kind of thing doesn’t belong on justarsenal. Who cares if player are exercising exercising rights as humans to do what they want. Such a ugly article to force your opinion onto others. Ugh, please more football less politics

  7. Sean Williams says:

    I’ve got my booster coming up next week…cannot understand why anti-vaxxers would put others at risk. Real dats from Israel show how important the booster is. Some people say that vaccinated people get the virus and can get ill, but when the RATIO’S are looked at between the vaccinated and unvaccinated then it becomes clear who is worse off….get vaccinated even if it is in some way to protect others.

  8. Drayton says:

    I’m no expert in UK law, but here in the States they’ve removed strict liability for medical treatment arising out of negative vaccination side effects. Why is that? We’ve always had strict liability for all vaccines in the past, so that alone makes me wary. If you want ppl to take the vaccine, you should at least have a way for them or their estate/family to recover in the event of any serious adverse effects to it.

    This brings to mind all those inflicted w narcolepsy from the swine flu vaccination that was rushed out a little over a decade ago. The manufacturers were protected from liability and the UK government denied damages/recovery from lawsuits brought against them.

    I guess the debate is, do you protect vaccine manufacturers from liability to encourage them to put their rushed vaccine on the market? Or do you protect citizens and encourage them to get the vaccine by giving them a remedy to recover in the event of serious adverse effects? For me, it’s undoubtedly the latter for obvious reasons, as this would also encourage drug manufacturers to ensure the vaccine is safe as possible, but the recent trend says governments (US and UK) will continue to choose the former route.

  9. Ozziegunner says:

    Having grown up in the generation when horrifying polio and small pox were rife and vaccination virtually eliminated these diseases, I have had a double jab for Covid19.
    Why something like Covid19 vaccination has been politicised, but thankfully polio and smallpox vaccinations were not. Unfortunately too many people are fixated on proving Darwin was right, in that some people appear too stupid to live.

    1. The-Real-Vieira-Lynn-4ever says:

      good on you OG…nice to hear that some lessening of restrictions are in the offing for your part of the world…as for the whole anti-vax debate, some on here are so clueless to the actually scientific/medical implications of their entirely selfish decision that any possibility of engaging in a rational discussion is simply a bridge too far…like yourself, I’ve addressed the fact that vaccines have been a seminal component of the modern day “social contract”, where sometimes collective rights supersede those of the individual…I think one of the biggest stumbling blocks is the fact that many of those who aren’t vaccinated have become so wrapped up in the political hysteria surrounding the pandemic that they’re unwilling or unable to see the forest through the trees…one can only hope that some sort of epiphany occurs before complications involving the mutational capacity of this virus makes matters invariably worse…take care

      1. SueP says:

        Excellent TRVL
        We can sometimes agree😊

      2. Ozziegunner says:

        👍 The “common weal”.

  10. Jakes Mradu says:

    I’ll wait for the safest tested vaccine……after taking the vax there must be no reason to wear a mask and social distance or worry about unvaxed people…….then you know you got the right one and not experimental….I won’t be surprised if footballers and others have the same view as me…….!

    1. Ozziegunner says:

      Jakes, I continue to wear a mask to protect other unvaccinated people Iike you!
      Those who are unvaccinated provide a pool of people in which the virus can mutate.

  11. Paul says:

    Unfortunately, the vaxxed are still able to contract cv19. And they are still able to pass on cv19.
    I’m sure professional footballers, would have been given all the facts and not just the paid media’s truth.
    As all human beings, they have the right to choose, what they put into their bodies. Without being vilified, for their individual choices.
    I agree with both Lord Denning and Drayton. You both make great points.
    The vaxxed should not be afraid of the unvaxxed….As the vaxxed are supposed to be protected 🤷

  12. Goonster says:

    This covid era has opened my eyes so much..
    We have a so many flat earthers, alein and conspiracy theorists.

  13. Mena says:

    If getting jabbed can’t keep you immuned 100% from COVID then what’s the point?

    1. Ozziegunner says:

      The point is Mena, that if you get Covid19 after vaccination, you will likely not even require hospitalisation, let alone die.

    2. Bob says:

      If I wear a condom and it doesn’t make me 100% immune to pregnancy and STDS, what’s the point?

      If I wear a seatbelt and it doesn’t make me 100% immune to injury in an accident, what’s the point?

      If I eat food and it doesn’t make me 100% immune to hunger, what’s the point?

Comments are closed

Top Blog Sponsors
JustArsenal Top Ten UK Blogs