The Lichfield Garrick has cancelled all shows until the end of March due to coronavirus.

The theatre’s management team met last night (16th March) to discuss the impact of the Government’s advice for people to stay away from venues.

In a statement they said refunds would be issued for all affected shows.

“We are really sorry to announce that Lichfield Garrick is cancelling shows for the remainder of March following the official guidance from the UK Government and Public Health England.

“While staff, performers, hirers and patrons vising the theatre in the coming weeks will be disappointed with the closure, we can’t risk the safety of all our friends that enter the theatre.

“Our box office team is currently in the process of refunding or crediting all patrons affected in the coming weeks who have booked tickets, and would ask people to please bear with us while we make our way through that list.”

Lichfield Garrick statement

Broadway singer Marisha Wallace had been due to appear this evening.

Other shows due to take place this month include Quill, Buddy Holly and the Cricketers, The George Michael Legacy, Hold On Let Go and The Glee Club.


Founder of Lichfield Live and editor of the site.

22 replies on “Lichfield Garrick cancels all shows until the end of March due to coronavirus fears”

  1. I see Keith and Flossy appear to prefer longer shutdowns, I disagree.
    When does it get to the points where life carries on? We cannot hideaway forever.

  2. Darryl…. If the object of the state is primarily to protect its citizens then they have to address situations on their merits. If it was decided to sacrifice a portion of the population in the interest of the economy then some would see that as acceptable. Probably the likes of those now emptying supermarket shelves. In later times people and places (like the Garrick) will be judged on their response to this national emergency. The government are trying to mitigate the impact of this virus and, in my opinion, should be giving clear instructions to places of mass gatherings. If hiding away buys us some time until a vaccine or, hopefully, nature diminishes the threat then I think this a good policy.

  3. Darryl, if you think we should be relaxing the restrictions after the end of March you have a nasty shock coming. All the evidence based public health advice is that we need to physically distance ourselves as much as realistically possible to ameliorate the peak of infection for two or three months. Let’s see where we are after that.

  4. So, unpopular opinion, in the past would we have hidden away or would we have to deal with the outbreak of a virus as best we could?

    At some point I’m going to die, Phil is, and Asellus is, nature finds a way.

    I don’t know Asellus’ personal situation but I’ve seen pictures of you Phil, my guess is you’re not going to be at home for god knows how long now trying to hold down a full-time job and entertain a 5 & 7 year old, I could be wrong and if I am I apologise, but education is important, otherwise we wouldn’t bang on about people becoming teachers all the time.

  5. Darryl, I will cut you a bit of slack. I do not believe you really think that this virus does not deserve the measures being taken. Sure the inconvenience will be massive but it is proportionate.
    My wife taught at Greysbrook for many years and we do have junior age grandchildren so the value of education is not lost on us.
    Like myself you are outspoken and sometimes contentious but this does not mean you lack compassion. Perhaps this is the time to express that.

  6. Quite right Daryl, in the past everyone just got on with things in the face of a global virus. OK, so a quarter of the world’s population got sick and a hundred million people died, but at least they were still able to go to the pub.

  7. A masterclass in missing the point and childish extremes.

    Take the two weeks and let those that are going to be symptomatic come out, but the children left school yesterday with no return date, businesses have no clue when they can start operating again, you cannot let this situation go on.

  8. What is your ‘point’ Darryl? You advocate letting the virus run its course and if you die you die. Do you think we should apply this policy to all medical conditions? Frankly you are so out of touch I wonder if it is a wind up or you are being a Troll.
    Presumably you hold your qualification from Bangor University with some regard. We likewise have to respect those with qualifications and experience to advise us on how to respond to this unique situation. All National governments seem to be adopting similar policies. What exactly do you know that makes you think your solution is better? Perhaps they respect humanity more.

  9. I have told my students that this is an almost unique situation and suggested they revalue all aspects of their lives including the things they take for granted, while studying the way it is handled, the way politics intrudes at times, the diversity of reaction etc. One such reaction is cognitive dissonance, the inability to take on a new idea that conflicts with the old one, and often results in the old idea being strengthen irrationally. I think we have to cut a lot of people some slack, at least just for now; they are facing demands they never envisaged.

  10. To everyone who believes these measures are a waste of time just tell the paramedics you don’t want to go to critical care.

  11. No Philip, I believe that nature finds a way, we’ve had immunisation for years, it is inevitable that something was going to defeat it.

  12. I can’t quite work out if you understand the gravity of the situation Darryl, or if it’s just that you think we should take a fatalistic approach and accept the potential catastrophic collapse of our entire health and social care systems for several months…

  13. What a load of hysterical nonsense, you’re as bad as the people on social media.

    The worst that can happen is we can’t treat everyone, we don’t treat everyone for all diseases and ailments anyway, are you equally animated about that?

  14. We can only respond to the problems nature presents us with. There are already viruses that we can only control but not erradicate. HIV is one such and even the common cold and simplex virus are amongst others we have to live with. MMR immunisation has great protective qualities and Polio and Smallpox are totally controlled. TB (which is a bacteria not a virus but spreads the same way) is largely controlled but new strains are providing a new challenge. As stated previously control of the source in Asia would help.
    Science is improving all the time in this field (probably because there is much money to be made) and, unlike the past, we understand better the way to mitigate their effects.
    John Griffin.. Your post is very measured and calm. How people respond to the current situation will doubtless be the subject of many psychological studies at a later time.
    The more fundamental issues of overpopulation, pollution in its many forms and climate change also plays a part in the pressures on humanity. That is another ongoing set of problems.

  15. I think you’re an idiot Darryl or to use the new word that has entered our vocabulary a ‘covidiot’. You’re views are very irresponsible. Who will you be blaming if you contract this virus, and because I’m a compassionate person I hope that you don’t nor any of your loved ones. You need to get a grip of reality.

  16. Lamentable Ann, is that the best you can do.

    If you had read and comprehended what I am saying, which is to take the weeks required to see the virus come out, keep people at home etc. but a protracted shutdown is over the top.

    All sectors will suffer untold damage.

    Who will I blame if I get it? I won’t blame anyone, only the interminably stupid talk in such terms.

  17. Just had a full refunds from Derby Theatre Wolves Grand & Birm Rep up to end May.
    Reckon it will June at best before entertainment gets back after this saga.

  18. Darryl, I think I do comprehend what you’re saying and I think the leading epidemiologists would agree with you in principle, just not in time scales. If it’s alright with you, I’ll follow the advice of the experts.

    Because the worst that can happen is that at the same time that there is a whopping great increase in people needing extra health care, either in or out of hospital, there is a big drop in people able to provide that care, because they are ill. So it won’t just be about the number of people with Covid-19 who are affected, it will be many others in receipt of health and social care services.

  19. Darryl, the ‘protracted shutdown’ is to attempt to keep the number of infected people in proportion to the medical facilities available. The ‘weeks’ as you put it will still occur over a much larger number of weeks as the number required (i.e. those who have been infected) will need to encompass a large proportion of the population before the infective potential is diminished. The timescale already forecast is probably broadly correct.
    Your solution would likely speed the process up somewhat. As you are a statistician perhaps you could quantify the consequences for the at risk groups and the medical profession.
    Unless there is some deep clandestine reasons for all major countries in the world taking such Draconian measures, then you can only reason that the best advice is being taken. The costs are massive and no government would undertake such measures lightly.
    Like any warlike situation most are concerned and even scared for their loved ones and friends. True in this instance the older age groups are most vulnerable. The very same groups that gave their children and grandchildren their chance in life.

Comments are closed.