Would you feel safe attending a game at Fenway tonight?

would you attend a game at Fenway tonight-pick 1


  • Total voters
    384

B H Kim

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2003
5,025
Washington, DC
I voted no. I have Nationals season tickets and I've requested a refund for the games already cancelled and expect to to do the same for the rest of the year.

Even if they limit attendance to enable socially distanced seating and can somehow spread out the crowds in the restrooms and concessions, there is no way to avoid crowds gathering before and particularly after the game at the entrances and exits.
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
10,815
The Paris of the 80s
I'd not go for about the same reasons as I barely went before - it's not worth the damn trouble. Same goes for flying - I don't mind the actual flying but I deathly hate the process of driving to the airport, going through security, waiting around like a jackass for an hour, possible delays, etc. Throw in the extra level of ...stuff... going on I'm super happy to just watch it on TV. As I usually do.

I truly don't know how people with season tickets deal with it under normal circumstances. There are only a handful of times in my life where going to the game was better than watching.
It's seriously unfun compared to 20 years ago unless you live near the ballpark. Between getting into the city (awful), parking (awful), and then getting gouged on tickets and beer... well, I think the game looks great in HD from home.
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
33,162
Getting out of Fenway after the 2nd out in the bottom of the 8th has been a disaster for quite some time already.

Probably have to start leaving in the 5th w. CV
 

amRadio

lurker
Feb 7, 2019
398
Between getting into the city (awful), parking (awful)
Unless you have more than two kids to bring in, the Newton Center green line train to Fenway or Kenmore is really the move here. Quick ride and parking is easy. That said, I'm a big fat "No" on subway trains until we win the war on germs.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
19,369
where I was last at
No way in hell I would go, but I'm still surprised at the results of the poll.
Its hardly scientific and we're a self-selected group of pretty hard-core baseball fans, rooting for one of the teams with a more rabid fan base, but I too am a little surprised. I thought it was going to be roughly 2/3 skip the game/watch on TV, 1/3 social distance rules. I suspect we're getting to be old farts who want to live to be older farts, are increasingly convenience driven, AND baseball is going to have a helluva time attracting the average schmuck back to attending games until this thing is cured.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,875
Maine
Taking into consideration pre/post game crowds in the concourses and on the streets surrounding Fenway as well as the fact that we ride the T in from Riverside, it's a total no go for me.
This is where I'm at too. They can do all the distancing they want as far as open seats and spreading people out while they're in the grandstand/bleachers watching the game. The nightmare of getting into the park and to those seats is where most of the danger lie, and it's not worth it.

I'm baffled by the people voting that they'd go to a game, tonight, without any precautions or protocols in place. I can only hope they voted that way to troll and have a laugh. I don't want to believe they're that fucking stupid and selfish.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,655
Hingham, MA
This is where I'm at too. They can do all the distancing they want as far as open seats and spreading people out while they're in the grandstand/bleachers watching the game. The nightmare of getting into the park and to those seats is where most of the danger lie, and it's not worth it.

I'm baffled by the people voting that they'd go to a game, tonight, without any precautions or protocols in place. I can only hope they voted that way to troll and have a laugh. I don't want to believe they're that fucking stupid and selfish.
11 out of 238 or < 5%. It's too high a number but I wouldn't label it as baffling, personally.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
This is where I'm at too. They can do all the distancing they want as far as open seats and spreading people out while they're in the grandstand/bleachers watching the game. The nightmare of getting into the park and to those seats is where most of the danger lie, and it's not worth it.

I'm baffled by the people voting that they'd go to a game, tonight, without any precautions or protocols in place. I can only hope they voted that way to troll and have a laugh. I don't want to believe they're that fucking stupid and selfish.
Even if the to and from was less concerning I think I would still pass. As things have only started to reopen here recently, we haven't really seen what sort of increase in cases that might bring. And who knows how many in attendance would be either from the recent hot spots or have visited there.
 

Patek's 3 Dingers

Luddite
Silver Supporter
Jul 5, 2018
430
I live near the Bay Area and attending a game at the Oakland Coliseum (RingCentral?) with no social distancing required, would be no problem at all. If I sat on the lower level, I could maintain a distance of at least 50 feet by sitting near either foul pole, up to 200 feet on the second level or have the entire third deck to myself.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,784
The wrong side of the bridge....
Yes, absolutely. The numbers in MA look extremely good right now. NYC looks good too, just from a quick glance at their data.
And the poll results tell you why. We took the virus seriously from fairly early on (though not quite early enough) and have shown good community discipline on the whole. The fact that this is working pretty well at the moment is a reason to keep doing it, not to stop.

Second half of 2021 is my target.
 

bgo544

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 25, 2003
672
East Bay
I voted no, though I want to take issue with the framing of the question a bit, as it touches on something that has bothered me about how people talk about risk of various activities. The important thing to me is not the individual risk to myself, but the collective risk to the community. Framing things in terms individual risk tolerance misses the point of restricting certain activities like large gatherings.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,963
I voted no. I have Nationals season tickets and I've requested a refund for the games already cancelled and expect to to do the same for the rest of the year.

Even if they limit attendance to enable socially distanced seating and can somehow spread out the crowds in the restrooms and concessions, there is no way to avoid crowds gathering before and particularly after the game at the entrances and exits.
This was my thinking. Especially at fenway where the concourses and streets are like ny subway cars at rush hour even if the place was 25% full
 

MJM2344

lurker
Apr 23, 2010
1,241
Tonight? No. Later in the summer, depending how everything has looked in Massachusetts, and everyone was spread out enough? Would at least consider but probably not. I also don't go to games that often though, so watching from home is fine.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,963
I wouldn't pay 99$ for one of me. But I'd make a nice contribution to charity if I could get 10,000 identical ones in the seats on a no-fan day, especially behind home plate.. But not of me. A fantastic birthday gift for someone else. "Hey, check out NESN right now." Players might be freaked out though by 10000 cardboard cutouts of the same random guy.

But seriously......would teams be able to score some extra cash if they sold seating areas to advertisers to cover with branded tarps?
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,613
Portsmouth, NH
I live near the Bay Area and attending a game at the Oakland Coliseum (RingCentral?) with no social distancing required, would be no problem at all. If I sat on the lower level, I could maintain a distance of at least 50 feet by sitting near either foul pole, up to 200 feet on the second level or have the entire third deck to myself.
Doesn't that describe most A's games?
 

nattysez

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
4,851
The seating is not the issue. The problems are going through the metal detectors, getting your ticket scanned, going to the bathroom, etc. All of those are going to require queuing up (at least partially) indoors, and people are not good at maintaining social distance when there's a long line. And you know there'll be a few assholes who refuse to wear a mask in line because of "muh freedoms" and will shout down anyone who reminds them they're supposed to wear a mask when inside. Having to think carefully about going to get food or going to the bathroom would put a significant damper on the overall experience.

I'll add that I went to the last weekend of Spring Training games in Arizona. At that point, the players were not allowed to sign autographs pre-game as they traditionally do for fear of catching it from fans, and there were ballpark announcements about washing your hands. Even then, with very few cases in Arizona and the "indoor" part of the parks being pretty open-air, I spent a lot of time worrying about whether being at the game was worth getting infected. I have a hard time imagining going to a game being fun under the current circumstances.

Doesn't that describe most A's games?

 

shawnrbu

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
28,683
The Land of Fist Pumps
1 person every 4 to 5 seats in a row, an empty row in front and behind, masks, I would be fine watching a game at Fenway. Under normal circumstances, I don’t go to the concession stand during the game anyway. I trust FSG to figure out a way to make entering safe if they decide to open in limited capacity at some point in 2020. I am also someone who passed on going to a PC game against Xavier in the beginning of March at the Dunk for point of reference because I did not want to get sick.
 
Last edited:

SydneySox

A dash of cool to add the heat
SoSH Member
Sep 19, 2005
15,605
The Eastern Suburbs
edit: This is on the main board; that's what I get for going straight to the thread.

Safe version - you are insane if you think attending anything in the US is 'safe'.
 
Last edited:
Jul 16, 2005
15
Halifax, Nova Scotia
I voted yes. My kids and I have already recovered from the 'Rona and I haven't been to Fenway in about 6 years. Do I think fans should be allowed at games? Certainly not yet. But if they were I'd take in a game.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
6,744
Should add if you had to ask would I feel safe right now, say, going to the Trop or a Rangers game at their new stadium? I would say no. In a month? Probably be fine.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,875
Maine
There isn't a ballpark in North America that is going to be "safe" to attend a game in this year.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,875
Maine
I know that's a crack about their attendance in general. On a serious note though, given how limited outside-the-house entertainment opportunities have been, if they allow fans to attend games, I expect a crush of people will want to go just to be out and doing something. Even in the cities where teams are generally treated with indifference.

I can think of no clearer evidence of people's need to be out and doing something/anything than the stories in NJ of people waiting in line to get into stores like TJ Maxx in the first few days after those places were allowed to open. If people will do that just to buy some discount pants, I think they'll flock to the ballparks.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
6,744
There isn't a ballpark in North America that is going to be "safe" to attend a game in this year.
The risk of catching the virus here is very low right now. Is it zero? Of course not, and things could certainly change if a second wave were to happen. But if you insist on saying that it will never be safe without a vaccine... I don't agree.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,875
Maine
The risk of catching the virus here is very low right now. Is it zero? Of course not, and things could certainly change. But if you insist on saying that it will never be safe without a vaccine... I don't agree.
The numbers are low in Boston because of the way they've kept large gatherings in check. Opening up a ballpark for 8-10,000 people to congregate kinda flies in the face of those efforts, and is exactly how you reverse the trends and get surges in cases. The single biggest reason for the crisis level increases in places like Florida and Texas and Arizona is that they opened things up way too much way too fast.
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
10,815
The Paris of the 80s
The risk of catching the virus here is very low right now. Is it zero? Of course not, and things could certainly change if a second wave were to happen. But if you insist on saying that it will never be safe without a vaccine... I don't agree.
Exactly what is your definition of "safe" here? Safe for who? Just you? Because a large sporting event crowd, especially in Texas or Florida where neither the state government or a sizeable chunk of the population are willing to do what is necessary to contain the virus, is the definition of unsafe. Maybe you get in and out don't catch anything, but what's likely is those crowds cause another surge. The inability of people to grasp that their actions may not hurt themselves but rather others is one of the biggest frustrations with this whole thing. People just can't wrap their heads around it.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
6,744
The numbers are low in Boston because of the way they've kept large gatherings in check.
Would have seen a spike in cases from the protests and riots if that was an issue. Didn't happen here. That's why I mentioned herd immunity, it works. It's not the ideal way of stopping the spread, but it works.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I know that's a crack about their attendance in general. On a serious note though, given how limited outside-the-house entertainment opportunities have been, if they allow fans to attend games, I expect a crush of people will want to go just to be out and doing something. Even in the cities where teams are generally treated with indifference.

I can think of no clearer evidence of people's need to be out and doing something/anything than the stories in NJ of people waiting in line to get into stores like TJ Maxx in the first few days after those places were allowed to open. If people will do that just to buy some discount pants, I think they'll flock to the ballparks.
This is likely true.

If they ban alcohol sales it would likely mitigate that, somewhat
 

grimshaw

the new rudy
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,501
Portland
I thought about it a bit more and I'm now in the firm "no" category. Things were looking more hopeful around the middle of the month since it had been about two weeks since the protests as well as phase II's and III's reopenings and the huge spikes I had been anticipating hadn't happened yet.

What has happened over the past week+ has convinced me that even here in the northeast where we have basically been the country's model for reopening, people will not be able to help themselves. Now I'm seeing packed outdoor seating, and large groups of 21 year olds shoving tables together to make up for missing graduation.. Drunk people are incapable of socially distancing themselves, and restaurant owners don't want to enforce anything because they need the business so badly.

I'd love to call everyone an idiot who lets their guard down, but it's human nature and is why fans ain't gonna happen.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
11,759
Would have seen a spike in cases from the protests and riots if that was an issue. Didn't happen here. That's why I mentioned herd immunity, it works. It's not the ideal way of stopping the spread, but it works.
I don’t know why herd immunity (with presumably and by extrapolation an extra 3million US hospitalizations)is better than sucking it up & waiting for a vaccine in a year. As Red Auerbach said after he drafted Larry Bird “Do you know how short a period of time one year is?”
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,875
Maine
I don’t know why herd immunity (with presumably and by extrapolation an extra 3million US hospitalizations)is better than sucking it up & waiting for a vaccine in a year. As Red Auerbach said after he drafted Larry Bird “Do you know how short a period of time one year is?”
Not to mention, herd immunity won't be achieved without a vaccine. Or more accurately, won't be achieved before there's a vaccine.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
The numbers are low in Boston because of the way they've kept large gatherings in check. Opening up a ballpark for 8-10,000 people to congregate kinda flies in the face of those efforts, and is exactly how you reverse the trends and get surges in cases. The single biggest reason for the crisis level increases in places like Florida and Texas and Arizona is that they opened things up way too much way too fast.
And if I might piggy back on this for a moment, a contributor to this is the fact that you have no idea no idea where these 8-10 people may be coming from.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,270
At the rate we’ve had infections, it’ll be years and years before we reach herd immunity.

From this specific standpoint, our efforts to flatten the curve have actually hampered herd immunity.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
52,022
Also, ‘herd immunity’ implies that people fully recover when in fact it seems many are left with permanent damage, still a lot of unknowns with this.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,875
Maine
At the rate we’ve had infections, it’ll be years and years before we reach herd immunity.

From this specific standpoint, our efforts to flatten the curve have actually hampered herd immunity.
And even without those efforts to flatten the curve, herd immunity would still take years to achieve...only it would be far more devastating across the board. More death, more debilitated survivors, and an outright crash of our entire healthcare system.

Distancing, limiting large gatherings, masks, etc to flatten the curve until a vaccine is found is a FAR more quick and efficient solution to trying to achieve herd immunity by letting the virus run unchecked.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,613
Portsmouth, NH
I can think of no clearer evidence of people's need to be out and doing something/anything than the stories in NJ of people waiting in line to get into stores like TJ Maxx in the first few days after those places were allowed to open. If people will do that just to buy some discount pants, I think they'll flock to the ballparks.
I think you vastly underestimate the amount of foot traffic the average store or mall still gets, especially after a large shutdown. I'd venture to guess an average shopping mall sees more people in and out than the largest ballpark, at least more than will responsibly (if that's possible here) be allowed in a park at first. Brick and mortar are still way down, but it's not dead, especially with the older demographic, which is most likely to be ignoring PPE to begin with.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
I think you vastly underestimate the amount of foot traffic the average store or mall still gets, especially after a large shutdown. I'd venture to guess an average shopping mall sees more people in and out than the largest ballpark, at least more than will responsibly (if that's possible here) be allowed in a park at first. Brick and mortar are still way down, but it's not dead, especially with the older demographic, which is most likely to be ignoring PPE to begin with.
I don't have any data other than what I've seen, but this is not been my experience.
 

Patek's 3 Dingers

Luddite
Silver Supporter
Jul 5, 2018
430
I know that's a crack about their attendance in general. On a serious note though, given how limited outside-the-house entertainment opportunities have been, if they allow fans to attend games, I expect a crush of people will want to go just to be out and doing something. Even in the cities where teams are generally treated with indifference.

I can think of no clearer evidence of people's need to be out and doing something/anything than the stories in NJ of people waiting in line to get into stores like TJ Maxx in the first few days after those places were allowed to open. If people will do that just to buy some discount pants, I think they'll flock to the ballparks.
There was recently a campaign rally that didn't attract a "crush" of people. There had never been an empty seat prior to that that one.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,322
especially with the older demographic, which is most likely to be ignoring PPE to begin with.

This is incorrect. In fairness there's A LOT of misinformation out there, some of which is showing up in threads here.

Older adults, classified as a high-risk population by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, are more likely than younger adults to say they have worn a mask all or most of the time in the past month: 74% of those ages 65 and older say they have done this, compared with 66% of those ages 50 to 64 and about six-in-ten of those 30 to 49 (61%) and 18 to 29 (62%).