Championship and Covid

wirelessdude01

arctictree wrote: »

Cul camps going ahead here this morning

In groups less than 15 I'm guessing. Let us know.

robbiezero

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

The poster that said underage games in Dublin and Kerry were pulled. Any chance they could provide evidence of this as nothing to indicate this on any website or on Facebook that I could find.

https://www.dublingaa.ie/juvenile/called-off-u12-fixtures-for-wednesday-19th-august

Hurrache

The cancellation of the Dublin under 12 games today seems just a holding pattern until further clarification.

robbiezero

Hurrache wrote: »

The cancellation of the Dublin under 12 games today seems just a holding pattern until further clarification.

Hopefully.

wirelessdude01

robbiezero wrote: »

https://www.dublingaa.ie/juvenile/called-off-u12-fixtures-for-wednesday-19th-august

Thanks for that.

hmmm

Hurrache wrote: »

Notions expecting a meeting and explanation. They should be told to with themselves and if they've any issues go through the proper channels, at least starting with a minister or public office.

The GAA is an important part of the country, but the statement was in poor form. I think the GAA should apologise and withdraw it, and someone from the government/public health should meet the GAA to give them more information on the background to the decision.

dobman88

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

The poster that said underage games in Dublin and Kerry were pulled. Any chance they could provide evidence of this as nothing to indicate this on any website or on Facebook that I could find.

Can look up Kerry Coiste na Nog on Facebook

https://twitter.com/Gneeveguillagaa/status/1295815394519920640?s=19

Bonniedog

I see one of my comments was removed. No-one is allowed call all this nonsense for what it is.

Of the deaths that have taken place, 0.06% have been under 24s.

Those under age of 44 account for 0.8% of deaths.

Anyone who thinks that is the basis for the restrictions on sport has no capacity for independent thinking.

Just like sheep.

Hurrache

Bonniedog wrote: »

I see one of my comments was removed. No-one is allowed call all this nonsense for what it is.

Of the deaths that have taken place, 0.06% have been under 24s.

Those under age of 44 account for 0.8% of deaths.

Anyone who thinks that is the basis for the restrictions on sport has no capacity for independent thinking.

Just like sheep.

It's about spread, nothing to do with the number of deaths in a specific age group.

Bonniedog

Hurrache wrote: »

It's about spread, nothing to do with the number of deaths in a specific age group.

Who are they spreading it to?

0 - 44 covers probably over 90% of the juveniles and their parents and mentors.

Of all deaths, 0.8% are within that cohort. So even if they are spreading it, only a handful have died and very few have been hospitalized.

But you think that is reason enough to shut everything dowm?

Vast majority of deaths are among old people. 45% in group aged 85 and over. Old people die and the % of elderly people who have died from the virus is not that much higher than the % of old people who died of all causes in 2018.

Indeed, huge numbers of them died in homes run by the medical profession and under state supervision! So in the one area where the state and doctors have 24/7 control, people died like flies.

But people like you think that they should tell us what to do every minute of the day.

Eh, don't think so.

slegs

People saying that they are closing down sport so we can open schools need to step back and think about how stupid that statement is. Closing down something low risk so we can continue with something high risk. There is nil logic in that.

Its clear that at this stage the government just want to be seen to be doing something and sport is an easy target.

It will make little difference to transmission one way or the other and I have little confidence that they do have evidence of transmission related to sport.

Also they are talking about going in cars to matches and meeting in pubs before and after. Why then are underage parents blocked from going to their kids matches then? Same family, hardly supping pints before an U12 game etc

At this stage I am fed up with it. Very hard to stay motivated to do the right things when silly decisions are taken just to throw shapes.

Bonniedog

Bonniedog wrote: »

I see one of my comments was removed. No-one is allowed call all this nonsense for what it is.

Of the deaths that have taken place, 0.06% have been under 24s.

Those under age of 44 account for 0.8% of deaths.

Anyone who thinks that is the basis for the restrictions on sport has no capacity for independent thinking.

Just like sheep.

Under 24’s can spread it the very same as someone 50 or 70 can. You haven’t a clue and can’t see anything past stamping your feet and crying that you won’t die so you want ball.

Hurrache

slegs wrote: »

People saying that they are closing down sport so we can open schools need to step back and think about how stupid that statement is. Closing down something low risk so we can continue with something high risk. There is nil logic in that.

The logic that's being missed is that if there's little or no community transmission, the lower the risk in schools. It's straightforward enough.

robbiezero

slegs wrote: »

People saying that they are closing down sport so we can open schools need to step back and think about how stupid that statement is. Closing down something low risk so we can continue with something high risk. There is nil logic in that.

Its clear that at this stage the government just want to be seen to be doing something and sport is an easy target.

It will make little difference to transmission one way or the other and I have little confidence that they do have evidence of transmission related to sport.

Also they are talking about going in cars to matches and meeting in pubs before and after. Why then are underage parents blocked from going to their kids matches then? Same family, hardly supping pints before an U12 game etc

At this stage I am fed up with it. Very hard to stay motivated to do the right things when silly decisions are taken just to throw shapes.

I think the GAA are dead right to question it. If they have evidence of tranmission related to outdoor sporting events, lets see it and fair enough on the restrictions if it is in anyway significant.

ThunbergsAreGo

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Under 24’s can spread it the very same as someone 50 or 70 can. You haven’t a clue and can’t see anything past stamping your feet and crying that you won’t die so you want ball.

If that is the case, then schools 100% should not be opening.

We had politicians lauding protests of thousands in the streets when the rest of us were in full lock down.

Now you cant have 30, outdoors, spread out?

GAA are totally entitled to ask why this decision was taken, as it appears contradictory to other messages and restrictions.

Bonniedog

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Under 24’s can spread it the very same as someone 50 or 70 can. You haven’t a clue and can’t see anything past stamping your feet and crying that you won’t die so you want ball.

I asked who they are spreading it to, and presented statistics.

All you do is parrot - not particularly coherently - what people in suits and white coats tell you

As Lou Reed said: "Turn him over, he's done."

arctictree

We live in a democracy. GAA as the largest sporting organisation have every right to question the reasoning behind rules that effect them.

Bonniedog

Hurrache wrote: »

The logic that's being missed is that if there's little or no community transmission, the lower the risk in schools. It's straightforward enough.

And this is supposed to be an intelligent justification for not allowing people watch games?


There is no valid argument for closing either schools or the latest restrictions on sport.

Bonniedog

Bonniedog wrote: »

I asked who they are spreading it to, and presented statistics.

All you do is parrot - not particularly coherently - what people in suits and white coats tell you

As Lou Reed said: "Turn him over, he's done."

When the insults start, you know they’re digging.

Childish selfish little tantrums aren’t going to get us out of this. Let the grown ups take it from here.

Hurrache

robbiezero wrote: »

I think the GAA are dead right to question it. If they have evidence of tranmission related to outdoor sporting events, lets see it and fair enough on the restrictions if it is in anyway significant.

The restrictions are not necessarily because there's outbreaks amongst the GAA, it's because the number of community cases is rising and they want to limit interaction within the community.

Hammer Archer

Bonniedog wrote: »

I see one of my comments was removed. No-one is allowed call all this nonsense for what it is.

Of the deaths that have taken place, 0.06% have been under 24s.

Those under age of 44 account for 0.8% of deaths.

Anyone who thinks that is the basis for the restrictions on sport has no capacity for independent thinking.

Just like sheep.

Mod:
Your deleted comment, in full, was "Wake up ffs :rolleyes:" (rolley eyes was part of it).
That's not adding to discussion and neither is commenting on moderation or saying that anyone who doesn't agree with you "has no capacity for independent thinking". And I say that as someone who agrees that these restrictions are nonsense. But there's a way to articulate your arguments and that isn't it.

Hammer Archer

The part of this that I cannot get my head around is that these new outbreaks have been largely caused by meat factories treating their employees like garbage and, if I remember correctly, going against HSE advice and forcing employees to return to work while waiting on test results (obviously resulting in a lot more infections). Yet they couldn't be forced to shut. Indeed, I think one was planning on remaining open throughout until pressure forced their hand. One of them has already reopened.
Why on earth are known virus hotspots at the centre of these new outbreaks allowed to carry on as normal yet outdoor sports which, as far as I know, have had little or no effect on transmission are forced to close games to spectators.

Billy Ocean

Just have look at Kingston Mills ( an actual expert) on off the ball this morning, inconsistent and confusing are the primary descriptions of yesterday's decisions

https://youtu.be/Wf-Y0LIRWvE

CrabRevolution

Hammer Archer wrote: »

The part of this that I cannot get my head around is that these new outbreaks have been largely caused by meat factories treating their employees like garbage and, if I remember correctly, going against HSE advice and forcing employees to return to work while waiting on test results (obviously resulting in a lot more infections). Yet they couldn't be forced to shut. Indeed, I think one was planning on remaining open throughout until pressure forced their hand. One of them has already reopened.
Why on earth are known virus hotspots at the centre of these new outbreaks allowed to carry on as normal yet outdoor sports which, as far as I know, have had little or no effect on transmission are forced to close games to spectators.

While the meat plants are no angels, they're not 100% to blame. A friend worked at one of the affected plants for 2 years and said that many of the workers voluntarily live 12 to a house and share 2 cars between the lot to save money. Their sole goal is to save as much money as possible in a few months or years to make a more comfortable living back home in eastern Europe. He never heard anything about the plant providing housing for any employees either, that seems to be more associated with the Brazilian contingent.

An employer can be as careful as they like (again, I'm not saying they were) but if your employees go home to live on top of each other with no distancing or precautions whatsoever what can you do?

Bonniedog

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

When the insults start, you know they’re digging.

Childish selfish little tantrums aren’t going to get us out of this. Let the grown ups take it from here.

You referred to me stamping my feet and crying and being childish

Meanwhile, I await some actual argument. You know. One with statistics or even referencing the ones I put up.

"Grown ups" are people who make their own minds up, by the way, based on facts not being told what to do without question.

castletownman

Billy Ocean wrote: »

that's it I actually think today's decisions have the potential to cause public health issues( people meeting indoors to watch streams) rather than help stem the tide of rising cases...

Well yesterday evening most pubs in Gorey that were open were reporting that they were already close to capacity with people booking in to watch the final. There will be one or two with beer gardens that in no way will regulate their numbers.

If I was the club, I would be holding a BBQ and screening the game both inside the clubhouse bar and on a couple of screens around the club ground (weather permitting of course). They even have an indoor soccer pitch that could be repurposed into a 'cinema' for the day. Could be a brilliant community event, and gardaí would be loathe to interfere given the optics it would entail.

No different to the pubs really and at least they'd have some control over who can attend.

Billy Ocean

CrabRevolution wrote: »

While the meat plants are no angels, they're not 100% to blame. A friend worked at one of the affected plants for 2 years and said that many of the workers voluntarily live 12 to a house and share 2 cars between the lot to save money. Their sole goal is to save as much money as possible in a few months or years to make a more comfortable living back home in eastern Europe. He never heard anything about the plant providing housing for any employees either, that seems to be more associated with the Brazilian contingent.

An employer can be as careful as they like (again, I'm not saying they were) but if your employees go home to live on top of each other with no distancing or precautions whatsoever what can you do?

but what about not giving their staff sick pay and giving staff paracetamol prior to having their temperature checked?

slegs

Hurrache wrote: »

The logic that's being missed is that if there's little or no community transmission, the lower the risk in schools. It's straightforward enough.

Then shut down the restaurants, non essential shops and pubs and go back to lockdown except for schools. Those are real high risk spreaders in the community.

Outdoor sports events with enforced social distancing is having no effect on transmission. Its just an easy call to make it look like they are doing something.

Why not simply require people to wear masks while social distancing at outdoor events if they think its an issue?

Bonniedog

Bonniedog wrote: »

You referred to me stamping my feet and crying and being childish

Meanwhile, I await some actual argument. You know. One with statistics or even referencing the ones I put up.

"Grown ups" are people who make their own minds up, by the way, based on facts not being told what to do without question.

There’s no argument to be had with you. You want to go to matches so anything that stops that is wrong. Other people want pubs so anything that stops that is wrong. We’re a selfish selfish country.

Billy Ocean

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

There’s no argument to be had with you. You want to go to matches so anything that stops that is wrong. Other people want pubs so anything that stops that is wrong. We’re a selfish selfish country.

but it's not like with like as being said time and again you're 19 times more likely to catch the virus indoors rather than outdoors, that's why people are questioning the logic of yesterday's decisions...