Suchergebnisse

This article examines a group of English cricket supporters known as the Barmy Army which explicitly and self-consciously challenges the traditions of spectatorship in English cricket. Following a discussion of who the Barmy Army are and a description of the distinctive characteristics of the style of their support, we seek to examine the factors which have led to the group's development at this particular time and in this specific sporting context. The article argues that in order to understand why the Barmy Army arose and why it has had such a significant impact on the game we must consider: a) society-wide processes such as time-space compression and the development of 'New Laddism'; b) sports-wide processes such as changes in football and in football supporter cultures; and c) sport-specific processes such as cricket's economic development and the internationalization of the game. The article concludes by suggesting that the Barmy Army represent a qualitatively new form of English national identity, that its behavioural style involves a blurring of traditional class-based forms of spectatorship, and that the influence wielded by this small, deviant, group indicates the relatively limited nature of the cricketing establishment's power.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) is a global priority. Contact tracing identifies people who were recently in contact with an infected individual, in order to isolate them and reduce further transmission. Digital technology could be implemented to augment and accelerate manual contact tracing. Digital tools for contact tracing may be grouped into three areas: 1) outbreak response; 2) proximity tracing; and 3) symptom tracking. We conducted a rapid review on the effectiveness of digital solutions to contact tracing during infectious disease outbreaks. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits, harms, and acceptability of personal digital contact tracing solutions for identifying contacts of an identified positive case of an infectious disease. SEARCH METHODS: An information specialist searched the literature from 1 January 2000 to 5 May 2020 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. Additionally, we screened the Cochrane COVID‐19 Study Register. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster‐RCTs, quasi‐RCTs, cohort studies, cross‐sectional studies and modelling studies, in general populations. We preferentially included studies of contact tracing during infectious disease outbreaks (including COVID‐19, Ebola, tuberculosis, severe acute respiratory syndrome virus, and Middle East respiratory syndrome) as direct evidence, but considered comparative studies of contact tracing outside an outbreak as indirect evidence. The digital solutions varied but typically included software (or firmware) for users to install on their devices or to be uploaded to devices provided by governments or third parties. Control measures included traditional or manual contact tracing, self‐reported diaries and surveys, interviews, other standard methods for determining close contacts, and other technologies compared to digital solutions (e.g. electronic medical records). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened records and all ...