The post you are reporting:
I don't understand the logic of this decision, and as a consequence doubt the validity of the reason given.
Scenario 1
England play in the World Cup, everywhere is quiet because most of the punters are home or at the pub watching the match. Ergo, there is little or no trade. The shops may as well close early and let their staff go and watch the match.
Scenario 2
England play in the World Cup, the match is screened in Market Square where there are about 1,000 people gathered to watch the game on th big screen. Not much, if any, business so the shops may as well close early and let their staff go and watch the match.
Scenario 3
England play in the World Cup, a match they must win. The critical game is screened in Market Square and a crowd possibly in excess of 1,000 turns up to watch. Local businesses find a way to tap into this unexpected bonus of captive customers by selling World Cup memorabilia, teas, coffees, soft drinks, cakes, fried chicken, burtgers, pies etc., etc., and make a good amount of money. The day is normally a half day but the opportunity to boost takings is so obvious the local traders stay open to maximise the benefit.
England WIN the must-win game and so Market Square businesses can look forward to at least one more day of bigger than planned takings.
Now, tell me. Why would anyone want to stop this from happening given the current economic climate?
Sorry folks, this decision stinks of behind the scenes fuddyduddyism by those who don't care what the public want.