Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hela Wigmen

Players breaching C-19 protocols (Merged Threads)

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

Incubation, on average 5-6 days, before symptom onset when it becomes the most contagious.  Work backwards from the positive testing confirmation.

That ignores the possibility of asymptomatic cases however.

The lack of any positive Salford cases indicates its more likely to be some time between their game finishing and them being tested for the next week that covid infected the squad. Hopefully they can identify that but to me it still seems like there needs to be stricter central regulations on what players and club staff can and can't do and if possible two testing windows per week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

That ignores the possibility of asymptomatic cases however.

The lack of any positive Salford cases indicates its more likely to be some time between their game finishing and them being tested for the next week that covid infected the squad. Hopefully they can identify that but to me it still seems like there needs to be stricter central regulations on what players and club staff can and can't do and if possible two testing windows per week.

There are many circumstances which can affect this but this info is from the World Health Organisation.

We are not privy to exact timings and, i dont think?, when the testing has been done at either club.

Edited by Lowdesert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SL17 said:

There’s an obvious reason. Avoiding  it and making  excuses isn’t an answer. 12 testing positive isn’t following guidance.

You can still catch it following the government guidance. A restaurant or shop they visited may have made the mistake for example. Point is should the RFL/SL guidance say they should take extra precautions and not do those things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

There are many circumstances which can affect this but this info is from the World Health Organisation.

We are not privy to exact timings and, i dont think?, when the testing has been done at either club.

From what Leeds have said it seemed like Mondays/Tuesdays were the main days so that they could get back to training asap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Nah, it suggests that the first infection was after the game in a video review or training session or physio appointment that took place between the game finishing and the next round of testing.

Edit: that said some reports seem to say that there is an incubation period of a couple of days where the virus is not infectious to others.

Or pub, or other social gathering 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Or pub, or other social gathering 

None of which are illegal or against the current SL rules, which is the problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tracing of the origin of this is very important in this example.

If no Salford players are found to be positive following this week's testing then the match can be ruled out.

This then means we need to review the training setup, changing rooms, gyms etc. as getting 12 people infected seems like there is a flaw there. If it is due to stuff outside of work, then rules need tightening up there too.

If what Peason has suggested is the source, then it suggests that the Physio/Doc may be a problem, if they have then had close contact with a number of players. This process would need a rethink if this is the case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and in any case, a lot surrounding this is speculation, what-if, possible blame-allocation etc. It is to be hoped and indeed expected that the tracking and tracing is active. 


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

None of which are illegal or against the current SL rules, which is the problem.

It’s not. But Pearson seemed sure it was picked up from a hospital rather than one of those places for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

It’s not. But Pearson seemed sure it was picked up from a hospital rather than one of those places for some reason.

He can say what he likes tbh, it doesn't change the fact that the have had a serious failing in the procedures at Hull FC. Either that is a Hull FC problem or its a wider Super League problem to solve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the rules does not eliminate risk. It reduces it very significantly.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

You can still catch it following the government guidance. A restaurant or shop they visited may have made the mistake for example. Point is should the RFL/SL guidance say they should take extra precautions and not do those things.

One or two catching it can be explained away like that but for it to have spread to around 30% of the first team players and officials suggests that, regardless of what the original source of infection was, procedures at Hull FC are either not fit for purpose or not being adhered to stringently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, arcticchris said:

One or two catching it can be explained away like that but for it to have spread to around 30% of the first team players and officials suggests that, regardless of what the original source of infection was, procedures at Hull FC are either not fit for purpose or not being adhered to stringently.

Possibly, and I think that needs to be looked into seriously. There's also the possibility of multiple infections being brought into the team that shouldn't be discounted.

Also, it could be a sign that they've made an oversight such as using 1 physio etc who after catching it from a player in training group A has then passed it to players in group B for example. This sort of information should be spread around the league (if not in public) so that other clubs can adapt and make changes accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Possibly, and I think that needs to be looked into seriously. There's also the possibility of multiple infections being brought into the team that shouldn't be discounted.

Also, it could be a sign that they've made an oversight such as using 1 physio etc who after catching it from a player in training group A has then passed it to players in group B for example. This sort of information should be spread around the league (if not in public) so that other clubs can adapt and make changes accordingly.

I agree with your second paragraph that there is a lot of peer review learning to take and share across the sport about this and it is not necessary to give all the details to the public.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Possibly, and I think that needs to be looked into seriously. There's also the possibility of multiple infections being brought into the team that shouldn't be discounted.

Also, it could be a sign that they've made an oversight such as using 1 physio etc who after catching it from a player in training group A has then passed it to players in group B for example. This sort of information should be spread around the league (if not in public) so that other clubs can adapt and make changes accordingly.

Looking at the UK from afar, and the Rules that the RFL have agreed with NHS,  i believe the risk is still high that a player will catch the virus under this regime.  They are allowed to go out and shop etc, their partners can do the same and the pictures I see of groups mixing together, pubs full up etc etc.  They can wear masks, gloves but they cannot account for another person who is contaminated coming in contact with them through packaging, money, sitting on a seat they sit on etc.

Clubs are track and tracing but whether good enough? Even so, it is retrospective.

It is certainly in everyones interest to notify the authorities (RFL,SL,NHS) and any other partnerships that they have a Case or several.  That should be recorded, the date, Test results, current status, time cleared, time returned together with 'close contacts' and any other relevant information.  In my experience of dealing with it here, people do not volunteer information 100%.  This is one common omission, unfortunately together with sharing that information without bias.  The blame culture and  social media do not help.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

Looking at the UK from afar, and the Rules that the RFL have agreed with NHS,  i believe the risk is still high that a player will catch the virus under this regime.  They are allowed to go out and shop etc, their partners can do the same and the pictures I see of groups mixing together, pubs full up etc etc.  They can wear masks, gloves but they cannot account for another person who is contaminated coming in contact with them through packaging, money, sitting on a seat they sit on etc.

Clubs are track and tracing but whether good enough? Even so, it is retrospective.

It is certainly in everyones interest to notify the authorities (RFL,SL,NHS) and any other partnerships that they have a Case or several.  That should be recorded, the date, Test results, current status, time cleared, time returned together with 'close contacts' and any other relevant information.  In my experience of dealing with it here, people do not volunteer information 100%.  This is one common omission, unfortunately together with sharing that information without bias.  The blame culture and  social media do not help.

 

Agreed. Tbh from looking at other sports, the general image has been presented by them that they're going above and beyond the standard rules set out by the government, including in punishment of their players for breaking those rules in the worse cases. In RL I don't get the sense that is happening. Other than the testing of course. 

I don't see the players being much different from anyone else except the weekly testing. And frankly I think we've seen the problem of that exposed dramatically at Hull FC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on people, don't make stuff up to suit your tribal prejudices, and trying to hide it via faux-sympathy doesn't make it better either.

Four posts removed and one person suspended for a month.

  • Like 2

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Agreed. Tbh from looking at other sports, the general image has been presented by them that they're going above and beyond the standard rules set out by the government, including in punishment of their players for breaking those rules in the worse cases. In RL I don't get the sense that is happening. Other than the testing of course. 

I don't see the players being much different from anyone else except the weekly testing. And frankly I think we've seen the problem of that exposed dramatically at Hull FC.

I think this is the problem. I've been really strict on this since early March, but I've been for a couple of meals now with friends and whilst we try and sit side by side etc. we are closer than the 2m (or even 1m) because of the table sizes to people not from our household. 

We are doing this based on calculated risk because of who we catch up with, but it is easy to abide by guidance but still end up in higher risk situations. Same with basic things like shopping etc. 

We need stricter rules than what the general public have. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think this is the problem. I've been really strict on this since early March, but I've been for a couple of meals now with friends and whilst we try and sit side by side etc. we are closer than the 2m (or even 1m) because of the table sizes to people not from our household. 

We are doing this based on calculated risk because of who we catch up with, but it is easy to abide by guidance but still end up in higher risk situations. Same with basic things like shopping etc. 

We need stricter rules than what the general public have. 

yep agree and I have similar examples to yourself. Never-the-less on the theme,  we only go to the restaurant that has 2m + between tables.  The other's we haven't been to again.  Although one problem is people we haven't seen breaching the space, in their keenness to follow up friendship and unthinking come close.... my wife soon tells him in no uncertain terms - she is very protective of me... chuckle

The point being  that we have to take the onus on oneself... hence not returning and telling the restaurant why their and then...

In the same way any professional rugby player knowing its his livelihood should be very strict... irrespective what any protocol allows. Allowing for the fact as you say sometimes you can be unfortunate...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think this is the problem. I've been really strict on this since early March, but I've been for a couple of meals now with friends and whilst we try and sit side by side etc. we are closer than the 2m (or even 1m) because of the table sizes to people not from our household. 

We are doing this based on calculated risk because of who we catch up with, but it is easy to abide by guidance but still end up in higher risk situations. Same with basic things like shopping etc. 

We need stricter rules than what the general public have. 

Absolutely. Take F1 for example there has been a concerted effort from the organisers to "prove their covid secured-ness" in the opening rounds to national governments. Even then with 3 positive tests they've managed to completely halt a spread due to strict "covid bubbles" and regular testing. You really get the sense that the whole sport is determined to show itself as responsible and capable regarding covid and that comes from the central authority. 

I've read recently that the RFL is pushing for RL to be one of the pilot events for crowds in England. You'd have to seriously question that when after 1 full round of fixtures we've had a mass outbreak at 1 club. That wouldn't fill many with great confidence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SL17 said:

Not hard those bubbles in F1..Until you change the sport to contact. Let’s get realistic here. Contact being the operative word.

I'd dispute that its "not hard", but even then its still around 1000 people (F1, F2, F3 and Porsche Supercars) in each location for several days operating in the same areas and garages. The virus orginally had an outbreak in the mclaren team in Australia showing how spreadable it is.

Regardless, its the attitude and overt "look what we're doing to be covid secure" point that I'm getting at. Could have chosen football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SL17 said:

Could have chosen snooker. The point is each environment requires different guidance.

Totally, but the Hull breakout suggests a significant gap in the guidelines for players and club staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has to be worked out from this is whether this is a Hull specific problem or whether it is a league wide issue (as suggested by Huddersfield's coach) that has manifested itself first at Hull? Or a bit of both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SL17 said:

How do you distinguish what is right and wrong? This is the difference in following government guidelines and enforcing what suits your business. The first and upmost is protecting your staff and then the customer. 
 

If the guidance doesn’t cover that within your structure then you change do you not? 

The government guidelines are clearly not enough for RL players and club staff such as doctors. For the chairman et al. in the stands they're fine, but not the rest.

Look at what other reopened organisations, sports and clubs have done and learn from that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SL17 said:

They where guidelines. You are suppose to act upon them accordingly, ie enforce your own.

So you agree the league needs to have its own central guidance that goes above and beyond the government rules and guidelines for normal folk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...