Jump to content

Two More players test positive


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Anonymouse said:

Having a Player in full lockdown means his entire household locking down too or it just wont work , kids at school wife out working and shopping ? Its not practical .

And so we see the end result of that: a season in disarray.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It probably doesn't help that most of the players will live in areas where cases are fairly high, i.e. across West Yorkshire and Greater Manchester.

The game cannot afford lockdown - it is skint. It is struggling to pay for testing now. Throw in extra shielding, accommodation and facilities and the competition will collapse. It is a case of h

I agree John but we have clubs here who are very one-eyed. Some of the clubs like Wakefield and Salford have slashed wages and now have full-time players on part time money and minimum wage. How the h

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I get that, but in fairness most of those kids activities have been closed down (till schools yesterday) and with the best will in the world you can get shopping etc. delivered. 

All of those are speculative however and what the higher ups at Clubs, SL and the RFL need to work out is how the virus is being picked up despite their measures.

Possibly (though they still need people to look after their kids if they’re training and their partner is at work). And as normal humans it’s not humane to ask them or especially their families to completely isolate either, some of them could earn more in a building site. 

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

Are you saying the season disarray is the players’ fault?

Nope. It was pretty much guaranteed to happen once the set-up didn't include secure bubbles.

  • Thanks 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

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

The game cannot afford lockdown - it is skint. It is struggling to pay for testing now. Throw in extra shielding, accommodation and facilities and the competition will collapse.

It is a case of head down, fingers crossed and try to get to the end of the season.

I guess you have to compare cost of losing Sky monies if games stopped against cost of extra measures to minimise infection spread, i.e monthly bubbles for players say... I would have thought that with schools returning and players having kids at school the risk goes further up

No idea of the comparable costs...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Possibly (though they still need people to look after their kids if they’re training and their partner is at work). And as normal humans it’s not humane to ask them or especially their families to completely isolate either, some of them could earn more in a building site. 

having shielded as many did for many weeks Its doable, although less than ideal.

Maybe should have looked at a secure bubbles with relaxation every 4 weeks, on a rotation basis of clubs with extra testing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Anonymouse said:

Having a Player in full lockdown means his entire household locking down too or it just wont work , kids at school wife out working and shopping ? Its not practical .

If the game can't do bubbles the game can't go on. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Possibly (though they still need people to look after their kids if they’re training and their partner is at work). And as normal humans it’s not humane to ask them or especially their families to completely isolate either, some of them could earn more in a building site. 

If we can't do bubbles we can't play on imo. Everyone is taking precautions and our players have to do so even more. They might be able to earn more on a building site (a travesty I agree), but they're not on a building site, they're professional Rugby League players.

Edited by Tommygilf
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

If the game can't do bubbles the game can't go on. 

I agree but how do you do bubbles when your partners also need to go work and your kids have to go to school ? Work places are high risk as we have seen several companies where the whole workforce have been testing positive .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Anonymouse said:

I agree but how do you do bubbles when your partners also need to go work and your kids have to go to school ?

This is what they were meant to have worked through in the months off.

None of us have the answer but we're not the ones tasked with running the game or completing the season. It's SL/RFL's job and, right now, it looks like they're falling short.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, redjonn said:

I guess you have to compare cost of losing Sky monies if games stopped against cost of extra measures to minimise infection spread, i.e monthly bubbles for players say... I would have thought that with schools returning and players having kids at school the risk goes further up

No idea of the comparable costs...

I agree John but we have clubs here who are very one-eyed. Some of the clubs like Wakefield and Salford have slashed wages and now have full-time players on part time money and minimum wage. How the hell are they going to persuade players on minimum wage to bubble up and shield from families? Some players I would imagine are having to take on other jobs and tasks to top up wages. 

We are in a perilous state and are trying to wing it through to the end of the season to hold onto Sky money. I can understand it, but it risks the whole competition imploding if it goes wrong.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any 'if' about it, with RLs track record and the nature of the virous it's a when, as said before the entire project is trying to be done on the cheap by the clubs and RFL and that won't work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Anonymouse said:

I agree but how do you do bubbles when your partners also need to go work and your kids have to go to school ? Work places are high risk as we have seen several companies where the whole workforce have been testing positive .

In fairness partner's work should be socially distant and safe, if not from home and kids in school has only been a thing since today. I don't imagine many of the rugby wags are working in a sandwich factory or butchery warehouse but I suppose they could be. In which you have to change your routine including sanitizing everything and washing as soon as you get home. Its exactly the same as if you had a person who is/was shielding at home and people have got on with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

If approx 0.04% of the population have it at any one time how have so many pro RL players been able to get it?  They should be in a far more controlled environment than the general population.  Someone's failing at their job big time here.

I suppose the answer is we actually do not know how many of the population actually has it . Testing is almost non existent in many areas and asymptomatic carriers do not realise they are spreading it .

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

If approx 0.04% of the population have it at any one time how have so many pro RL players been able to get it?  They should be in a far more controlled environment than the general population.  Someone's failing at their job big time here.

Tbf I think we're seeing a reflection of an overall trend of increasing infections but virtually zero hospitalisations. Its also true that RL players are one of the few individuals being tested weekly and several will live in areas currently with high or at least above average rates of infection.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Clogiron said:

I don't think there's any 'if' about it, with RLs track record and the nature of the virous it's a when, as said before the entire project is trying to be done on the cheap by the clubs and RFL and that won't work.

I agree. Salford to their credit paid for 2 extra rounds of testing on top of their weekly rounds and some players arranged to go to their local NHS testing facility. To me this is a sign we need more testing. If we can't afford "bubbles" then we should be testing twice weekly.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Tbf I think we're seeing a reflection of an overall trend of increasing infections but virtually zero hospitalisations. Its also true that RL players are one of the few individuals being tested weekly and several will live in areas currently with high or at least above average rates of infection.

But this calculation is based on the increased testing.  They're testing nationwide and estimate approx 0.04% of the population currently has it.  It's a terrible failure that RL can't control it better than this.

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

I suppose the answer is we actually do not know how many of the population actually has it . Testing is almost non existent in many areas and asymptomatic carriers do not realise they are spreading it .

That's not correct we're testing more than ever it's not a guess.

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

I suppose the answer is we actually do not know how many of the population actually has it . Testing is almost non existent in many areas and asymptomatic carriers do not realise they are spreading it .

not so sure... the ONS study gives a good indication plus the Oxford app which monitors and has to=date been a good indicator of potential hot spots before they become such... They both give good estimates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

But this calculation is based on the increased testing.  They're testing nationwide and estimate approx 0.04% of the population currently has it.  It's a terrible failure that RL can't control it better than this.

It's certainly a sign that there is a gap in the regulations somewhere. Though afaik all RL's positive cases have been asymptomatic as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

But this calculation is based on the increased testing.  They're testing nationwide and estimate approx 0.04% of the population currently has it.  It's a terrible failure that RL can't control it better than this.

No it’s not that simple. The game is testing 100% of players every week as a minimum. The percentage being tested across the country is a minute fraction of that

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12204/12061580/sam-tomkins-super-league-players-should-sacrifice-more-after-positive-coronavirus-tests

Players see the gaps in regulations too. Never leave anything like this to "common sense". Like the speed limit on a road, some people will view the rules with caution and stay well within them and some will push them to the nth degree of their limitations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...