Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is a great idea and they should require a negative test before returning.

How will you do this when testing isn't available to all? If done on a voluntary basis, who would be funding the testing? I would love nothing more than to have everyone tested, but it's fiscally impossible.

you're right but most kids do not/ will not even get tested. so if the first test was available to them or warranted- then a second test would be- especially if it was positive and most likely available if they have insurance. then they can repeat for a negative test. But to subject hundreds of people with a known positive test and no known negative is not a good idea. remember kids rarely show symptoms. It wont catch 100% of the cases but may go a long way to catch many.

It's not saying that they have to be tested, it's just saying that if a kid tests positive you would tell them. Which if you weren't going to do that anyway, you're an awful person.

Anonymous wrote:this is a great idea and they should require a negative test before returning.

How will you do this when testing isn't available to all? If done on a voluntary basis, who would be funding the testing? I would love nothing more than to have everyone tested, but it's fiscally impossible.

this is a great idea and they should require a negative test before returning.

Someone on another soccer board mentioned that their club is requiring families to inform the club if their kid tests positive for the virus. The club promises to keep it anonymous and private, but wants to have the ability to inform other players on the team should there a player come down with the virus next Fall.

Does that sound reasonable? I wonder if some parents might just try to hide a positive case to avoid their kid being stigmatized by the other players, though not sure if it needs to be written into the contract.