While all the Premier League teams have said they wish to finish the season, the plans dubbed “Project Restart” seem far-fetched and reckless.
At a time when we are still expected to distance ourselves, a large gathering behind closed doors at neutral grounds is still too risky and too soon.
Put simply, the rapacious greed of football cannot be put above the vital needs of society.
Yet perhaps the scariest prospect for boardroom chiefs would not only be declaring the current season null and void, but accepting that next season is probably a write-off too.
Our current situation is akin to that of the First and Second World Wars. This is the scale of the crisis the world faces for both public health and the global economy.
Football tried to carry on during the Great War and completed the 1914 to 1915 season, but the public did not respond well to it, and the 1915 to 1916 season was cancelled.
At a time when hundreds of people still die from coronavirus every day, keeping people safe must be the main concern.
We should expect a much longer interruption to the beautiful game, be that months or even years, if it means lives can be saved.
It was reported by the BBC that club doctors have raised their fears to Premier League bosses, and we await to hear their answers.
Right now, player safety cannot be guaranteed.
Concerns about whether the Premier League would be liable if football players or staff got seriously ill or died have not been addressed.
Why the rush? The Esk has reported on the money worries facing football sponsorship deals and player contracts.
But Fifa’s chief medical officer said it may be better to hold off until the end of August before we know what position society is in.
Other questions about what would happen if a squad had to self-isolate, thus making a club unable to play a match, must also be vexing the bosses.
It doesn’t seem that long ago that Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta was in self-isolation, forcing suspension of all top flight fixtures in March.
The Athletic has reported that for the season to resume, as many as 40,000 coronavirus tests would be needed.
How can this possibly be justified at a time when as a country we have not been able to deliver effective testing for doctors, nurses and frontline care staff?
Even before footballers, there are countless other workers who do not yet have access to tests who should come first. Care home workers, teachers, and supermarket staff are all more important, for example.
As a gay man, if football does return on June 8, what is to stop me inviting 22 men to my flat for an orgy? (Assuming of course I can find 22 men who are interested)
In my view the both present the same risks of infection. At least in the latter case I may get the workout I need.
If neutral venues are used, then teams will have to travel, stay, and be fed.
At a time when the Government is still warning us about non-essential travel, how would these journeys to neutral stadia be justified?
For me it shows scant regard for low-paid hotel staff, coach drivers, and catering staff who would have to be on-hand for Premier League squads.
Why should they put themselves at extra risk?
The Government has set out its five tests for coming out of the lockdown, and we await to see what restrictions, if any, will be eased.
But until testing capacity is ramped up so that everyone who needs a test can get one, or there is an effective vaccine, then football cannot restart safely.