HELL AND HIGH WATER: GETTING NON LEAGUE FOOTBALL STRATED AGAIN

Radstock Town get Covid Ready

August 1^st marked the tentative return of non-league football, 141 days from its suspension on Friday, March 13^th. Whilst the 2020/21 season hasn’t begun, its pre-season has, behind closed doors at least, so is this a cause for celebration or will it prove to be a false dawn?

Clubs at Steps 5 and 6, the level of the Non-League pyramid occupied by the Toolstation Western League, can begin their League season from Saturday, September 5th, ahead of the Southern League, which is set to start on September 19th. However, Leagues at this level have become increasingly reticent about publishing their fixtures, with the Ebac Northern League stating that their season will only begin when “spectators are allowed to attend matches” and their fixture list will only be released “once the issue of spectators is resolved nationally”.

Whilst optimism about fans return has been growing within the game in recent weeks, the news that pilot events at cricket, horse racing and snooker had been postponed on July 31st sent shockwaves across the non-league pyramid. A spike in Coronavirus cases has set the Governments unlocking timetable back by at least two weeks. In Blackburn with Darwen, social media reports indicated that Clubs have been told to stop contact training and not to play friendlies. Given the Prime Ministers statement on Friday, football at every level is facing the very real prospect that its return will be delayed, in spite of the FA’s announcement that its own Cup competitions are scheduled to kick off at the start of September.

Indeed, Friday’s announcement has also served to change the tone of footballs conservation within itself about what constitutes a safe return. The Football Association’s position is that: “A return to competitive football should only happen once clubs and facility providers have completed the necessary risk assessments and comprehensive plans are in place.” Inevitably, this has prompted much debate as to how the FA’s guidance should be interpreted. What is required as opposed to advised. 

Whilst the Head of the National League System, Laurence Jones, made it clear in a letter sent to Western League Clubs on July 18th, that any pre-season fixture must be played behind closed doors, the door was left open for Somerset County League sides to play in front of “socially distanced” spectators. That door was closed on August 4^th when Mr Jones issued a further letter extending the behind closed doors ban to the NLS Feeder Leagues, what the FA refer to as the “Grassroots” of the game.

The other loophole, concerning the legal status of football clubhouses has also been addressed by the FA. As a licenced premise, football clubhouses are subject to the same regulation as pubs and restaurants, but the FA have clarified that “there should be no entry to the ground for spectators” from such venues. The fact that the FA have been forced to issue such a statement after only one weekend of friendly matches, highlights a fundamental weakness with their own communication strategy.

Had the Prime Minster chosen not to “squeeze the brake” on unlocking Britain, Clubs would have undoubtedly looked to those choosing a more “liberal” interpretation of the guidance as the benchmark. But that is no longer the case and social media references to bars being open for Saturday afternoon matches, have been replaced by explicit announcements that fans are not allowed to enter grounds to watch games.

The initial optimism was undoubtedly fuelled by the notion that whatever guidance had been put into place, football would largely be left to police itself when it came to monitoring Covid-19 compliance. Neither the Leagues or the County FA’s have the resources to ensure anything more than a Risk Assessment has been published, whilst guidance provided to Match Officials clearly states that “Referees are not responsible for clubs, players or spectators complying with The FA

guidance. The home club and their Covid-19 officer have responsibility for managing these matters to the best of their ability”.

As the rest of the country began to re-open, the momentum to get us back playing had become almost irresistible, until Boris put the brakes on. Now the narrative is very different, with local lockdowns and coronavirus cases on the rise.

As it stands, Western League Clubs selected to play at the start of this seasons FA Cup competitions will do so without fans in the ground. Presumably, those not willing to make this sacrifice will forfeit their place in the competition. The FA may believe that non-league football at the Western League level will start on September 5^th, but with evidence that Leagues are withholding fixtures until Government provides clarity around the spectator situation, this is looking increasingly unlikely.

Most worrying of all is the prospect of a second Coronavirus wave, which has clearly fuelled Government policy in Bradford, Manchester and Leicester. If local lockdowns continue to be enforced this will have obvious repercussions on Leagues abilities to carry out their fixture schedules and then there is the Great British weather!

Last season, the Western League First Division, where Welton Rovers and Radstock Town play their football, had completed two thirds of its fixtures when the Coronavirus pulled the plug on the League campaign. Yet the Southern Counties East League First Division, which plays its football at the same step of the non-league pyramid had completed 79% of their fixtures, meaning their teams had almost half as many matches outstanding as their Western League counterparts. This discrepancy was not caused by the Coronavirus, rather it was a result of a particularly bad winter for the South West of England.

Local lockdowns, a second wave, fans in grounds and the Great British weather. These are the challenges facing the restart of non-league football. Yet arguably the greatest challenge the Western League will face this season is not when it will start, but when it will finish. In his July letter to Non- League Clubs, the Head of the National League System clearly stated that the league season will end no later than Saturday, May 15^th. In recent seasons it has been the FA’s intransigence around this end date that has proved so problematic for Leagues, particularly at the base of the pyramid, sometimes requiring Clubs to play on consecutive days in order to meet the deadline.

If Coronavirus has taught the football family anything its that we really are all in this together. If there can flexibility at the start of the season, particularly when it comes to getting fans into grounds, then why can’t there be the same flexibility at the end of the season? Telling Leagues at the base of the pyramid that they must conclude their matches by a specific date, come Hell or High Water, is challenging enough, but when you are faced with Hell AND High Water, it feels particularly unfair.

The Blame Game

On Friday 17th July, 126 days after competitive football was suspended, the Football Association announced that the Government had approved its plan for the return of the National game. Non-league football now has a roadmap to return, as long as it has the “necessary modifications in place to mitigate the transmission risk of COVID-19”. The phased return to competitive football starts now, with competitive training for up to 30 people. From August Clubs can play pre-season friendlies, with a view to the League season starting in September.

For the Toolstation Western League, the 2020/21 season can begin from Saturday, September 5th, ahead of the Southern League, which is set to start on September 19th. The FA are urging Clubs, players, coaches, match officials, league officials, volunteers and fans to read their guidance, in addition to the latest Government guidance on COVID-19.

The FA press release, hailing the return of competitive football, made clear that: “A return to competitive football should only happen once clubs and facility providers have completed the necessary risk assessments and comprehensive plans are in place.” And in so doing the FA gave the clearest indication that making football Covid-19 compliant was going to be someone else’s problem.

Whilst their press release congratulated themselves on “working hard over recent weeks to prepare guidelines for the safe return of grassroots football”, they omitted to identify who would be responsible for ensuring this guidance would actually be met, leaving Clubs, players and officials in limbo as to whether the FA’s protocol was a suggestion or a requirement.

As licenced premises, football clubhouses are subject to the same regulation as pubs and restaurants, leaving local Councils with the responsibility to monitor their compliance and investigate complaints. Yet outside the clubhouse, who will be responsible for monitoring social distancing and test and trace? Leagues may be the first port of call, but will complaints made to them simply be passed on to County FA’s to investigate?

Football's greatest challenge to become Covid-19 compliant rests on the limited resources and expertise available at the base of the pyramid. Volunteers already hard stretched to manage a matchday now find themselves with the unenviable task of managing social distancing in the stands, bars, turnstiles and toilets. During play, players must regularly sanitise themselves and the ball, especially when it leaves the field of play.

Government guidance requests that players “avoid unnecessary breaking of social distancing such as pre-game handshakes, huddles, face-to-face confrontation with opponents and officials, and scoring celebrations.” Bad news if you are a star striker, good news for match officials, unless of course match officials are set to be given new powers to manage on field Covid-19 breaches?

If Club Officials were left scratching their heads about just how much work they’d need to do get their ground Covid-19 compliant, many were left fuming at the FA’s stipulation that pre-season fixtures must be played behind closed doors. 

Given that gatherings of more than 30 people are currently not permitted, this revelation is hardly surprising. However, as early as June 19th the FA told the Step 5 and 6 Leagues, of which the Toolstation Western League is one, that Clubs cannot resume their season ‘behind closed doors’. Pedants will point to the fact that “season” does not mean “pre-season”, but if we’ve got to the stage where we are attributing as much weight to what the FA aren’t saying, as what they are, then Non-League football really is in a parlous state.

As football, at every step of the pyramid, rebuilds in the wake of Covid-19, communication from the Government and the FA must be crystal clear. Pre-season provides Clubs with an opportunity to claw back valuable revenue denied to them over recent months by the global pandemic. Whilst many fans will celebrate the safe return of football, the economics of the game, particularly at the base of the pyramid, rely on pints, pies and programmes.

Any measures limiting Clubs income, coupled with the increased costs of becoming Covid-19 compliant, not to mention the “impact on travel costs” for match officials, recognised in the FA’s own guidance document, could push Non-League Clubs past a financial tipping point that means they’d be better off not playing. It’s hard to believe that the FA haven’t recognised this fact but then again they didn’t consult the Step 5 and 6 Leagues on any of the provisions they were considering putting in place to restart football, provisions that apply from the Vanarama National League to the Toolstation Western League. 

Its worth reflecting on the fact that when it came to ending the 2019/21 season, the FA treated the National League differently to the way they voided the Leagues below, including the Southern League and the Western League. Yet when it comes to restarting non-league football, all Steps appear to be treated equally, save in one respect. The strat date. The Chairman's opening remarks at the June 19th meeting clearly stated that "if at Steps 5 & 6 we start before Steps 3 and 4, then you will find a flood of people turning up at Step 6 matches as they are the only matches available for people to attend, which would then contravene Government Regulations. Thus we must remain together in this as a untied set of Leagues." By July 18th this position had changed. Clearly when it suits the FA they are perfectly happy to treat the Steps differently, so why can't this be reflected in their restart guidance?

The FA’s failure to consult, coupled with the failure to clarify which measures are mandatory, is likely to lead to a two-tier approach to compliance, where those with the resources and inclination are likely to take a dim view on those perceived to be playing fast and loose. The football family, like the rest of society has had to come to terms with the greatest restriction of liberty any of us have ever known. For any of us to continue under that regimen we must have absolute clarity on what is required of us and ultimately what is to happen to those who won’t make the effort or the sacrifice for the greater good. Otherwise, what is the point?

Footballs Staggered Start

As pubs and restaurants re-opened on July 4th, football fans eagerly awaited news of when the beautiful game might once again return. Five days later the Government announced the return of recreational sport, which the Football Association hailed as “the safe return of competitive grassroots football”, yet a week later the football family is still none the wiser as to what our “new normal” will actually look like.

We do know that the FA have submitted their action plan for getting football back underway, to the Department for Culture Media and Sport. Once approved, this will signify that football is “in compliance with COVID-19 Secure guidance”, a prerequisite for any organisation that wishes to operate outside of the general Coronavirus guidance.

The burning question occupying Club Officials, fans and players alike, is what concessions have the FA had to make to get us playing and watching again? Indeed, these negotiations have gone on behind closed doors, so to speak, with no consultation of the Leagues and more importantly the Clubs, who will be required to implement the guidance.

The FA made it clear at a Leagues meeting on June 19th that non-league football can only be played in front of fans, yet we don’t know how many fans that might be and there is growing speculation in the game that the FA’s insistence about playing in front of fans may not extend to pre-season. Indeed, the FA also talked about restarting the non-league pyramid at the same time, but there is growing speculation that the FA have reneged on that commitment, preferring instead to start the National League ahead of the Leagues below. The staggered restart may prove to be a sensible strategy, but if found to be correct, it calls into question all of the governing bodies other commitments to the grassroots game.

In terms of the detail, we know that wearing a face covering in shops and supermarkets will become mandatory from July 24th, but we don’t know whether this will extend to football grounds. We know that pubs and restaurants have been collecting contact details to support the test and trace programme, so we can only assume that Clubs, already following much of the advice required for the hospitality industry to re-open, will need to do the same. One way systems, hand sanitising stations and socially distanced queuing are all measures we’ve been coming to terms with in recent months, but unlike the supermarkets and petrol stations, the responsibility to implement and manage these restrictions will fall on the volunteers, not paid professionals. 

How rigorously these restrictions will need to be implemented and whether there is any elasticity in the guidance between the top and the bottom of the pyramid, remains to be seen. Football is notoriously a game of the haves and the have nots and if we are to get back playing and watching again, the whole of the football family will need to come to terms with this new reality. As with pubs, some Clubs will be better at adhering to the guidance than others. Leagues lack both the inclination and resources to police Clubs efforts to become Covid compliant. So where will the final responsibility lie?

The FA’s own guidance to the Leagues has put the onus back onto the Clubs. Every Club at Steps 1 to 6 is responsible for producing their own Action Plan, which must be published on the Club’s website, whether they have one or not. So for any fan, player or official not happy with the arrangements they find at particular grounds, what should they do and will this be addressed in the FA’s guidance?

We really are in this together, so for anyone concerned about the suitability of a Clubs Covid compliance I’d suggest a friendly word in the ear of the Chairman is the right way to go. If we really want football to return we all going to have to work collectively to make sure that restrictions are applied and respected. I’m not advocating turning a blind eye to breaches of compliance, simply that our focus should be on constructive criticism. If Clubs can’t, or won’t, address the most important aspects of making their facilities Covid safe then I’d suggest its up to the County FA’s to step in, given that they have the personnel and punitive powers to bring Clubs into line.

The guidance published by the FA can’t only address how Clubs can open up to spectators or how players can safely use changing rooms, it needs to recognise that a shorted 2020/21 season will bring with it its own challenges. What if we experience a second wave, would we void another season? Would we take a pre-season played behind closed doors, if it meant grounds could open up to some, or all, spectators from September?

As the days pass, speculation grows about what footballs “new normal” will look like and who’ll get to watch it. The Coronavirus, much like the great British weather, won’t observe the niceties of the Leagues Committee’s meeting schedule, so we need to come up with an approach that is better, more responsive and much more representative of our football family and our beautiful game. Whether we get that detail by the end of this week remains to be seen, but there can be no doubt that a one size fits all approach won’t work for the non-league pyramid, whether the start is staggered or not.

Step One for All and All for One

When Alexandre Dumas wrote The Three Musketeers in 1844, little did he know that "one for all and all for one" would be central to the Football Associations plans to restart the National League Pyramid 176 years later. The headline coming out of the Step 5 and 6 Leagues meeting on June 19th was that all parties are aiming for a September kick off to the 2020/21 season with the caveat being the approval of Government, specifically the Department for Culture Media and Sport. However, there is another rider and that is that all Steps start together.

The Toolstation Western League sits across both Steps 5 and 6 of the pyramid. The FA have made it clear that Western League matches won't be starting until its safe to play National League matches, which means that Welton Rovers won't be playing until Bath City are back.

But for many Clubs, players and fans, the key question going into the meeting was what restrictions would grassroots football face in order to get back playing again? Speculation was rife about that the possibility of closed changing rooms and tea huts, with fans wearing facemasks and subject to temperature checks at the turnstiles. The FA are clearly hoping that the "new normal" won't be that much different to the "old normal", not least because they recognise that the burden for implementing any restrictions will fall hardest on those who are volunteering their time, potentially driving them out of the game.

When football does start all Clubs will need to publish a Covid-19 Risk Assessment, the details of which will hopefully become clearer over the coming weeks, when more guidance is released by the DCMS and the FA. However, this has done little to stem the speculation around what restrictions Club volunteers, players, spectators and match officials might be subject to, if we are all to enjoy a September kick off.

Pre-season, by definition, must occur before the League campaign can begin. If League fixtures are to start in September the pre-season will take place in August.

For many Clubs at the bottom of the pyramid, friendly home matches against higher level opposition can be a real money spinner. Given the financial drought Clubs have been subject to, the prospect of a lucrative friendly is understandably enticing.

It appears that the FA, they have pledged to provide Clubs with specific instructions relating to the start of both the League and pre-season campaigns. The irony is that given all its efforts to start safely, pre-season presents football with a health and safety tsunami. Last season Western League Hallen played Bristol City in front of 1,800 fans. A gate like that can make a Clubs season, so how do we reconcile Covid-19 Risk Assessments for non-leagues Clubs getting a professional league gate?

The FA’s presentation explored the possibility of both limiting ground capacities and using advanced ticket sales to manage attendance, but even these measures mean footballs ability to manage “the new normal” will be tested to destruction from the very start.

In terms of the FA’s scenario planning for running a full season, a great deal of work has gone into understanding weekend and weekday “slots” for fixtures to be planned, based on the number of teams in each Division. At Step 5 and 6 the FA presentation identified a maximum of 20 teams in each Division, yet the Toolstation Western League Premier Division includes 21 teams. From a fixtures perspective 21 teams might as well be 22, as the weekly allocation of games for an odd number of teams means one side is always left without a fixture.

Last season this anomaly hampered the Leagues ability to address fixture congestion in the wake of the severe weather disruption that occurred during the winter months. Given the prospect of a condensed 2020/21 campaign, the Western League is already at a disadvantage if the FA’s calculations have failed to recognise the number of fixtures the Premier Division will need to complete.

Whilst the FA recognised the threat to matches posed by local lockdowns and a second wave of the Coronavirus, there was no mention of the flexibility needed to cater for the Great British weather, particularly at the base of the pyramid where pitches and facilities are more susceptible to disruption. Whilst most of us want to know when next season can begin, perhaps the more pertinent question is when will it need to finish? The FA has given Leagues two clues about this. Firstly, we know that all Steps will start together, secondly we know the FA have indicated they are planning for a “traditional start” to the 2021/22 season.

Before the outbreak of Covid-19, the Western League had requested an extension to the 2019/20 season, only to be told by the FA they expected all games to completed by 25th April, a decision that appears to have been predicated on the ‘pure pyramid’ restructuring programme scheduled to be set out on May 12th. This sets a worrying precedent, as if the FA are planning on a traditional start to the 21/22 campaign, which will inevitably revisit the League changes planned for this start of this coming season, then with all Steps starting together, its hard to see any flexibility being given to a weather disrupted 20/21 campaign.

If Covid-19 has done anything for grassroots football, its to place into perspective the debates raging last season about lateral movement out of Leagues. Football with lateral movement is better than nothing and given that we’ve had nothing for the past three months, we all know what that feels like!

Regardless of the restructuring scheduled for 21/22, lateral movement might still have a part to play in this season. The FA’s position on this is:

“Lateral Movement will be considered within a Step – but only where such is appropriate – ie that Clubs are swapping Leagues, with the agreement of the two clubs and their Leagues, or that the FALC feel that lateral movement is imperative for this season to assist with the allocations, this will only be considered in a scenario of real need, as major lateral movements will take place at the end of this season in the planned but now delayed restructure.”

If the FA believe that all Step5/6 Leagues should have a maximum of 20 teams, does this suggest that lateral movement out of the Western League Premier Division would qualify as an “imperative for this season”? If this was to be the case, we can only hope the chosen Club would be consulted and in agreement.

To be fair on the Football Association they are clearly working very hard, with the Department for Culture Media and Sport, to get us playing again and for all fans that must be welcomed. When it comes to the challenges of managing this situation with a voluntary workforce, the FA certainly talk a good game, so it will be interesting to see how practical their advice actually is, when it is released over the coming weeks. However, we are dealing with the law of unintended consequence and with the best will in the world, Fridays meeting has possessed some fundamental questions about the practicality of bringing back grassroots football and what that might mean for the Toolstation Western League.

You Can Take Our Temperature, But You’ll Never Take Our Tea Hut: Grassroots Fans Consider Bringing Back Non League Football

Football fans across the country have been wondering when they might get back to the terraces, ever since matches were suspended in February. On Friday June 19th, the journey back to playing takes a step closer for grassroots fans, when the Football Association meets with the League Officials at Steps 5 and 6 of the pyramid.

Whatever restrictions may be needed to get football underway at the top of the professional game, playing behind closed doors is simply not an option for non-league football. Given that no more than six people are currently allowed to meet outdoors at any one time, these conversations might appear somewhat premature, but there are clear clues as to what the “new normal” might look like for football fans.

Social distancing is something we are all coming to terms with, as are face masks, gloves and contactless payments. Football has its own frame of reference, with FIFA and the FA both providing guidance on what the Government’s Coronavirus regulations mean to the football family. So with this in mind, Ian Nockolds, Research Director at Bath based research agency Cognisant, developed a survey to assess what measures fans, players, managers and officials would consider putting up with, if it meant grassroots football could start playing again.

The headline figures show that 44% of respondents to the survey would not agree to football coming back if it meant changing rooms had to be closed. For players in particular, the prospect of playing without changing facilities was something that half (50%) of those completing the survey were not prepared to do, whilst the number of managers not prepared to return without changing rooms was 61%. The inevitable consequence of playing without changing rooms would mean that players would need to travel to games in kit, something that 26% of respondents didn’t consider viable, rising to 35% amongst players.

As pubs continue to be closed, so do Clubhouses. The prospect of playing without Clubhouses open was something that 39% of survey respondents were not prepared to consider, a figure that increased to 52% when Club Officials were asked the same question. Given the importance of Clubhouses to the grassroots football economy, it’s hardly surprising that tea huts were also identified as a facility fans can’t live without. Overall, the closure of tea huts was identified by 38% of respondents as something they would not agree to. Nearly half (48%) of Club Officials wouldn’t play without tea huts, whilst a third (33%) of supporters expressed the same opinion.

Fourth on the list of measures the football family wouldn’t agree to was spectators wearing gloves at games, at 29%, whilst a third of fans (33%) felt this was an intervention too far. Spectators wearing mouth and nose protection was also an issue for the fans, with 26% indicating they wouldn’t agree to this. Yet fans were far more amenable to the prospect of submitting to temperature checks before entry, currently a requirement at airports, with only 16% of spectators indicating they wouldn't agree if this measure was brought in. However, Club Officials were less amenable to temperature checks, with 34% indicating they wouldn’t agree to this restriction.

Necessity is the mother of invention and with the restrictions that Covid-19 has placed upon us, what about the opportunities to evolve the way we administer our National game? Will Coronavirus sound the death knell for the paper programme and will cash payments at matches also become a thing of the past? Only 9% of survey respondents indicated that introducing cash only payment for food and beverage purchases would mean they would not return to football. Slightly more respondents were so attached to their paper programme that it became a deal breaker, with 17% suggesting they couldn’t continue to attend games with only an electronic programme. However, the prospect of cashless payments to match officials was something that nearly a quarter (24%) of respondents felt would be preferable going forward, putting it second only to the use of hand sanitizer as a desirable innovation from restarting in the wake of the virus.

Perhaps the most critical factor in understanding these results is the degree of dissent football can tolerate in order to restart. When we look at those saying they will not agree to come back, could the game go ahead with 10% fewer fans or even Clubs? What is the magic number beyond which the game isn’t viable? Club and League Officials carry the weight of responsibility without the Government giving them green light, as shown by their more pessimistic responses to this survey.

If one thing is clear from these results its that the different branches of the football family tree have very different opinions as to what they would consider an intervention too far, when it comes to seeing our National game return. If this exercise has proven anything its that its not a simple as fans thinking the FA, or the Leagues, have got their decision “wrong” as to whether we start again or not. They need to recognise the differences that exist between their opinion, the players, officials and the Clubs.

As with any research exercise there are some important questions to answer in terms of who answered the survey and when. This survey was open for responses between June 11th and June 17th and was completed by 759 respondents. Of those responding 96% were male and 61% were from the Western, Wessex and South West Peninsular Leagues. In terms of age, 59% were aged 44 or under, with 30% aged 25-34. So what does this mean? Respondents to this survey were self selecting not random, they were overwhelming male, from the South and South West and probably younger than most non-league fans would have considered representative of the Step 5 and 6 football family. However, at 759 completed interviews this survey represents the largest single data collection exercise across the football family that has been conducted into attitudes concerning restarting football. Whatever its limitations, this survey overwhelming has many positives that enable it to add to, rather than detract from the debate surrounding grassroots game.

With that in mind, I’d like to thank everyone who took the time to complete this survey including Phil Hiscox from the South West Peninsular League and Patrick McManus, the manager of Brockenhurst FC, who both made a considerable effort to encourage others to participate in this project. A special note of thanks also goes to Warminster Town’s Roland Millward, whose tireless efforts to promote this survey across the pyramid have made this exercise far more successful than I would ever have considered it could have been.

Stay Safe, Protect the NHS and Love Grassroots Football.

Restarting Grassroots Football Survey

Cognisant’s Research Director, Ian Nockolds and 
Marketing Manager Paul Myers, wearing Welton Rovers
 shirts  in support of Football Shirt Friday

A non league football fan has launched a survey asking players, supporters, match officials and managers for their thoughts on the return of grassroots football.

Ian Nockolds, presenter of the Toolstation Western League Podcast, is also Research Director at Bath based Market Research company Cognisant Research, and has used his professional expertise to develop a survey designed to understand how the football family will cope with the restrictions likely to be imposed on non-league clubs, if the 2020/21 season is allowed to start.

Ian explains, "The Leagues at Steps 5 and 6 have been invited to a meeting with the FA on Friday, June 19th. Ahead of that meeting I'd like to ask fans what they think about the return of football and the restrictions they might need to accept to watch a game this year.

Whilst the FA consults with the Leagues and they have their own way of engaging with their Clubs, this survey is about developing a body of opinion that demonstrates what the football family is thinking.

I'm hoping we'll have enough responses to give Clubs, Leagues and the FA, an idea what the football family is thinking. You never know, consultation like this might even catch on”!

The Restarting Grassroots Football Survey can be accessed here . The survey will remain open until June 17th, when results will be posted on this blog.

Living With Risk: The Road Map for the Return of Grassroots Football

Whenever non-league football restarts one thing is for sure, we will all be living with risk. The World Health Organisation has said that no vaccine is 100% effective, so even the best-case scenario for coming out of the Coronavirus crisis, carries risk. More realistically, the governments scientific advisers have played down the prospect of a vaccine being ready before 2021, so if we are going to get playing without one, we need to consider how much risk we are prepared to put up with.

I say “we” because depending on your involvement, be it as a fan, player or administrator, the nature of the risk we are all exposed to will be different. Fans and officials will be able to socially distance, even in clubhouses, where the guidance offered to pubs is likely to apply. Whether we end up one or two meters apart, using screens and facemasks, we can see a way back.

Yet the road map for players is far more complicated. The guidance published by the Department for Culture Media and Sport on May 30^th provides a first glimpse into what the Government are thinking. Strictly speaking the most relevant announcement to the grassroots game was that “restrictions around group exercise will be relaxed (on June 1^st) to allow for up to 6 people to meet outdoors for non-contact sport, fitness and training sessions”. But football is a contact sport and whilst the professional game has found a route back to playing, their journey is inextricably linked with a rigorous testing regime that the rest of society, let alone grassroots football, can only dream of.

The FA published their own guidance for “permitted grassroots football activity” on June 1^st. Yet this failed to add any further clarity to that provided by the DCMS on the previous day. Contact training appears to be permissible with members of your own household, but other than that its “football training or fitness activities in groups of no more than six, keeping two metres apart at all times.”

When the Government gave the green light to the resumption of competitive sport behind closed doors, it wasn’t talking about grassroots football. However, the government guidance did leave a number of clues to the future of competitive football that are as relevant to sides at the base of the pyramid, as those at its pinnacle.

• All competition delivery partners and user groups involved, from the teams and athletes, to the support staff, officials and media, must travel individually and by private transport where possible;

• Prior to entering the competition venue, they are expected to carry out a screening process for coronavirus symptoms.

• A one-way system for the movement of people and vehicles should be established around the competition venue;

• Social distancing should be maintained by all groups where possible. This includes the competing athletes and support staff on the bench and field of play, such as during any disputes between players and referees, or scoring celebrations;

• Dressing room usage should be minimised, however showers can be used in line with Government guidelines;

• All non-essential activities, such as catering, should be limited;

So, we know that, players can train in groups of five, given that the sixth person will be a coach, a fact confirmed by the FA. Anyone going to train or to a game needs to go on their own, no car sharing. One way movement around grounds, like we’ve been doing in the supermarket. Players arriving in kit for training and matches. Dressing rooms and even tea huts, with catering facilities limited, are also something to consider.

Realistically, we can only hope that the stringent restrictions professional football has been subject to will ease over the coming weeks, but without a zero infection rate and without a vaccine, non league fans need to remember the words of the DCMS, who’ve said that “Where social distancing cannot be maintained, sports governing bodies, clubs and teams should implement a rigorous regime to monitor for symptoms”.

Practically speaking, this can’t mean testing at non-league level, so will we have to get used to having our temperature taken at the turnstiles, contactless payments at the bar and socially distanced goal celebrations?

FIFA issued their own risk assessment tool on May 29th, along with the World Health Organization (WHO), UEFA, the European Club Association (ECA), FIFPRO, the World Leagues Forum and European Leagues. In their joint statement the World Governing Body warned that “Until a vaccine is developed for Covid-19, the team environment will be quite different.

The aim of this joint effort is to consider the health of all participants in footballing activities, the risk assessments and the factors that need to be in place in order for football, both at a professional and at an amateur level, to resume safely.”

Ultimately, it will be for the Government to decide when grassroots football can return and presumably for the FA to tell us how it can safely resume. With that in mind its worth considering the Governments own traffic light system for measuring the Coronavirus alert level in England.

We know schools and shops have re-opened as we “transition” from Level 4 to Level 3, so at what level will football fans be allowed back through the turnstiles? Will we need to be at Level 2 before the 2020/21 season is a realistic proposition, or can we kick off when we are transitioning out of Level 3?

Whatever the authorities are thinking it would be helpful if they could share it with the football family. We know this is an unprecedented crisis but planning for the return of football is something Clubs and Leagues want to start doing now, we just need to understand how we can live with the risks.