New draft MoCo Executive Order - masks

[Anonymous]

Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Lots of kids are wearing masks while playing soccer now. Hasn’t really been an issue, even in travel games. I think MCPS will probably require masks for high school sports when they start up as well. The kids seem to have adjusted to this pretty easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Lots of kids are wearing masks while playing soccer now. Hasn’t really been an issue, even in travel games. I think MCPS will probably require masks for high school sports when they start up as well. The kids seem to have adjusted to this pretty easily.

The problem is people will not come here to play. The VA teams are not wearing masks. Other MD counties are not. In the fall, until MoCo changed the rule nobody would play here. All travel club games were held out of the county including home games. I have not seen any travel games with kids in masks other than a handful voluntarily. I have never seen a VA travel team kid wear a mask in a game, always as of the end of November.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Lots of kids are wearing masks while playing soccer now. Hasn’t really been an issue, even in travel games. I think MCPS will probably require masks for high school sports when they start up as well. The kids seem to have adjusted to this pretty easily.

Lol okay... if it’s not effecting performance than the mask isn’t doing its job. But, wearing a mask does restrict airflow and communication. Just wait until warmer weather, more humid weather.

Lastly, if it didn’t impact performance, pro and collegiate players would be wearing it. Wearing a face mask is the TSA of medicine. Merely an appearance of security lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

[Anonymous]

My kids are playing basketball in a Rec league requiring masks and it absolutely effects their performance especially during the final quarter. I can’t imagine them being outside on a hot day doing the same amount of running.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

The constitution has a section about indoor dining? Wow, I did not know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

The constitution has a section about indoor dining? Wow, I did not know that.

That’s because you’re formed by received opinions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

The constitution has a section about indoor dining? Wow, I did not know that.

Does the TV have a section about cell phones and internal combustible engines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

The constitution has a section about indoor dining? Wow, I did not know that.

If your view is that liberties exist only if specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights, you better tell the people from NARAL and NOW that they are wasting their time, and defend the NRA. I think the prevailing view among scholars of all stripes is that government has only those powers identified in the Constitution, and the question in this specific context is whether orders restricting everyday activities and the pursuit of a livelihood have a rational basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

The constitution has a section about indoor dining? Wow, I did not know that.

If your view is that liberties exist only if specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights, you better tell the people from NARAL and NOW that they are wasting their time, and defend the NRA. I think the prevailing view among scholars of all stripes is that government has only those powers identified in the Constitution, and the question in this specific context is whether orders restricting everyday activities and the pursuit of a livelihood have a rational basis.

Good luck, the person you’re responding to is probably not interested since it didn’t come from a CNN chyron.

[Anonymous]

So stupid. Kids have been playing organized soccer since last June with no issues or outbreaks.

The few cases in the DMV have been all Family/Friends related.

The biggest example was at Potomac where it was found the 4 young men were at an indoor activity where it was believed they contracted the illness. Not mentioned also is how this group of young men are often together.

Believe it or not, the Potomac example is currently the biggest news story thus far in youth soccer. Unfortunately, you won't find any follow up stories online about how the cases evolved.

Kids also do not spread the disease to adults except in rare cases.

You can find many arguments both for and against but in regards to soccer, nationwide, including Texas and Florida, we have yet to see a large outbreak due to the sport.

Argue all you want, but these are just the facts.

Clown world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So stupid. Kids have been playing organized soccer since last June with no issues or outbreaks.

The few cases in the DMV have been all Family/Friends related.

The biggest example was at Potomac where it was found the 4 young men were at an indoor activity where it was believed they contracted the illness. Not mentioned also is how this group of young men are often together.

Believe it or not, the Potomac example is currently the biggest news story thus far in youth soccer. Unfortunately, you won't find any follow up stories online about how the cases evolved.

Kids also do not spread the disease to adults except in rare cases.

You can find many arguments both for and against but in regards to soccer, nationwide, including Texas and Florida, we have yet to see a large outbreak due to the sport.

Argue all you want, but these are just the facts.

Clown world.

bUt mUh cNn!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just came out. In addition to allowing 25% indoor dining, they tweaked the language on youth sports mask exception. No longer says vigorous activities but rather "certain sports." Doesn't define the "certain" sports but links to an AAP document that doesn't list soccer in the examples. I guess it will come down to how it is interpreted, but they very intentionally changed it for a reason. Doesn't look good. Hope I am wrong and missing something.

Won't affect MSI since they already require, but a huge blow to travel home games and tournaments, and a death sentence to Soccerplex.

Allowing 25% indoor dining? Remember these orders that violate the constitution are basically letters to Santa Claus.

The constitution has a section about indoor dining? Wow, I did not know that.

Found the anti-Trump vote

[Anonymous]

This was done to prepare for the upcoming fall sports that are currently in the registration process for MCPS that are set to begin at the end of February. It gives them the authority to say what sports they can require them if they want.