I honestly think they'd be better off just saying:
'This is what's going to happen - we're going to ease up for approx this long, until numbers hit X, then we'll lock down again until numbers hit Y - we think approx that long. Then we'll ease up again until X, then lockdown till Y.... in patterns, until we get a vaccine and have most of the population jabbed OR until we've spread it enough that it doesn't get out of control. Whichever comes first.
In the meantime, here is the list of priorities for avoiding restrictions....'
That way, everyone knows where they stand. This is effectively what is and has to happen, but they need to spell that out, and frankly, they need to stop faffing with these regional lock-downs and just set a blanket position. There's not, actually, a huge issue with a 10pm close. Things will just start earlier, if they need to. There is a problem with long-term trying to restrict people from seeing family and friends, because it's ultimately unrealistic.
From a personal perspective, I'm getting excessively tired of pubs and sport being given such importance. If we only have a certain amount of tolerance for things being open, then it astounds me that we've prioritised people going out to get drunk rather than allowing celebrations for one-off life events. Our schools are a mess, and we can't see family - but 'Spoons is open.