Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 9:03 am  

Mild Rover wrote: Long story short: 1. Do you agree/accept that mortality as a whole in England and Wales was much higher in April this year than in April of recent previous years? Hitting a one-week peak (hopefully) at about double the average rate? 2. Assuming ‘yes’, do you agree that by far the largest reason for this change to the norm is the the current coronavirus pandemic? I'm not a scientist obviously. What do you think of these charts? https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status ... 01761?s=19

Mild Rover wrote: Long story short: 1. Do you agree/accept that mortality as a whole in England and Wales was much higher in April this year than in April of recent previous years? Hitting a one-week peak (hopefully) at about double the average rate? 2. Assuming ‘yes’, do you agree that by far the largest reason for this change to the norm is the the current coronavirus pandemic? I'm not a scientist obviously. What do you think of these charts? https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status ... 01761?s=19

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 9:40 am  

Mrs Barista wrote: I'm not a scientist obviously. What do you think of these charts? https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status ... 01761?s=19 He needs to make his mind up about trusting data visualisation 73.6% of statistics are made up on the spot afterall....

Mrs Barista wrote: I'm not a scientist obviously. What do you think of these charts? https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status ... 01761?s=19 He needs to make his mind up about trusting data visualisation 73.6% of statistics are made up on the spot afterall....

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 9:52 am  

IR80 wrote: He needs to make his mind up about trusting data visualisation 73.6% of statistics are made up on the spot afterall.... That was 7 years ago, maybe things have changed a bit since then.

IR80 wrote: He needs to make his mind up about trusting data visualisation 73.6% of statistics are made up on the spot afterall.... That was 7 years ago, maybe things have changed a bit since then.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 10:20 am  

Mrs Barista wrote: I'm not a scientist obviously. What do you think of these charts? https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status ... 01761?s=19 I think they’re the best we have currently. My point of disagreement with our new friend Squirrel Hexadecimal, really, is that he suggests very few people can interpret the data, given their subtleties or (he suggests, I think) inconsistencies in their collection. While there’s a plausible case to be made that a lot of people aren’t great with statistics, these data are not remotely subtle in the UK. And I don’t think anybody is suggesting that living people are being mis-registered as dead. IR80 wrote: He needs to make his mind up about trusting data visualisation 73.6% of statistics are made up on the spot afterall.... Data visualisation can be done in a misleading way. Messing about with the y-axis without making it glaringly obvious that you’ve done so is a bugbear of mine. However, these look fine and the graphics include the numbers. Also, tbf to the FT, they identified this as the best metric a while ago, in Early April. https://www.ft.com/content/88f993a0-74e ... d274e920ca One area where I think scientists have maybe shot their discipline in the foot is in encouraging scepticism and questioning (and quite right), which has found broad appeal, alongside rigorous scientific thinking, which hasn’t so much. And then struggling engage the public on whether the Earth is getting warmer and why that might be, rather than whether it is flat or round.

Mrs Barista wrote: I'm not a scientist obviously. What do you think of these charts? https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status ... 01761?s=19 I think they’re the best we have currently. My point of disagreement with our new friend Squirrel Hexadecimal, really, is that he suggests very few people can interpret the data, given their subtleties or (he suggests, I think) inconsistencies in their collection. While there’s a plausible case to be made that a lot of people aren’t great with statistics, these data are not remotely subtle in the UK. And I don’t think anybody is suggesting that living people are being mis-registered as dead. IR80 wrote: He needs to make his mind up about trusting data visualisation 73.6% of statistics are made up on the spot afterall.... Data visualisation can be done in a misleading way. Messing about with the y-axis without making it glaringly obvious that you’ve done so is a bugbear of mine. However, these look fine and the graphics include the numbers. Also, tbf to the FT, they identified this as the best metric a while ago, in Early April. https://www.ft.com/content/88f993a0-74e ... d274e920ca One area where I think scientists have maybe shot their discipline in the foot is in encouraging scepticism and questioning (and quite right), which has found broad appeal, alongside rigorous scientific thinking, which hasn’t so much. And then struggling engage the public on whether the Earth is getting warmer and why that might be, rather than whether it is flat or round.

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 12:41 pm  

Mild Rover wrote: I think they’re the best we have currently. My point of disagreement with our new friend Squirrel Hexadecimal, really, is that he suggests very few people can interpret the data, given their subtleties or (he suggests, I think) inconsistencies in their collection. While there’s a plausible case to be made that a lot of people aren’t great with statistics, these data are not remotely subtle in the UK. And I don’t think anybody is suggesting that living people are being mis-registered as dead. Data visualisation can be done in a misleading way. Messing about with the y-axis without making it glaringly obvious that you’ve done so is a bugbear of mine. However, these look fine and the graphics include the numbers. Also, tbf to the FT, they identified this as the best metric a while ago, in Early April. https://www.ft.com/content/88f993a0-74e ... d274e920ca One area where I think scientists have maybe shot their discipline in the foot is in encouraging scepticism and questioning (and quite right), which has found broad appeal, alongside rigorous scientific thinking, which hasn’t so much. And then struggling engage the public on whether the Earth is getting warmer and why that might be, rather than whether it is flat or round.

Mild Rover wrote: I think they’re the best we have currently. My point of disagreement with our new friend Squirrel Hexadecimal, really, is that he suggests very few people can interpret the data, given their subtleties or (he suggests, I think) inconsistencies in their collection. While there’s a plausible case to be made that a lot of people aren’t great with statistics, these data are not remotely subtle in the UK. And I don’t think anybody is suggesting that living people are being mis-registered as dead. Data visualisation can be done in a misleading way. Messing about with the y-axis without making it glaringly obvious that you’ve done so is a bugbear of mine. However, these look fine and the graphics include the numbers. Also, tbf to the FT, they identified this as the best metric a while ago, in Early April. https://www.ft.com/content/88f993a0-74e ... d274e920ca One area where I think scientists have maybe shot their discipline in the foot is in encouraging scepticism and questioning (and quite right), which has found broad appeal, alongside rigorous scientific thinking, which hasn’t so much. And then struggling engage the public on whether the Earth is getting warmer and why that might be, rather than whether it is flat or round.

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 3:31 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

Long story short:

1. Do you agree/accept that mortality as a whole in England and Wales was much higher in April this year than in April of recent previous years? Hitting a one-week peak (hopefully) at about double the average rate?
2. Assuming ‘yes’, do you agree that by far the largest reason for this change to the norm is the the current coronavirus pandemic?

There are more deaths, however they are not FROM Covid19, so no, I do not accept that this change in the norm is due to the virus itself, this is demonstrably proven to be a false assumption. Increased deaths as a result of the actions/reactions due to the virus, yes, but that's never going to be mentioned or alluded to is it?

Unintended consequences from actions taken were frankly predictable, these have been covered elsewhere and are valid, my colleagues/organisation see the direct consequences of the actions/enforcement re lockdown and how this changes matters for the vulnerable in a very significant way regards their health and wellbeing.

Remove/reduce care and the people giving care in a significant way and the vulnerable, those with serious underlying conditions die in greater numbers, when the elastic was already over stretched it's obvious there was going to be a significant effect due to the actions/reactions. Induce fear in the vulnerable/those with serious health conditions such that they don't seek help and this means more deaths.

Do you accept the words of the governments own adviser regarding the majority of deaths of people whose conditions were so severe their outcome would not change whether they had a virus or not?

Whichever way people's thoughts are and how you look at data we need to address the fallout, we as individuals cannot make inroads into how government do things in reality. And addressing the fallout is for here at least how we keep a hold of the sport, the clubs, employees and how we can improve things on the back of a jolt that might make certain parties wake and take action for the better of the sport. And that discussion be for all that are connected to it, fans, players, owners, administrators, sponsors, media and any other associated parties.

I replied to a post suggesting vaccines as a solution (from a company well know to be bascially dodgy AF), i didn't sign up just to respond to that, it just happened to be at the top of the threads.
I came here to discuss rugby and how we can move forward re the club and rugby as a whole, maybe leaving C.19 discussion, vaccines/treatments could be left to AOB/tea Room/politics and we chat about the sport/clubs/sporting events and dealing with what 'we' do and can control or have input into and just have that in the rugby chat section?

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 3:56 pm  

.... try posting in hexadecimal, I'm sure it would make as much sense.

"I came here to discuss rugby" ....pull the other one.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 4:28 pm  

48756c6c20 524c4643 wrote:

There are more deaths, however they are not FROM Covid19, so no, I do not accept that this change in the norm is due to the virus itself, this is demonstrably proven to be a false assumption. Increased deaths as a result of the actions/reactions due to the virus, yes, but that's never going to be mentioned or alluded to is it?

Unintended consequences from actions taken were frankly predictable, these have been covered elsewhere and are valid, my colleagues/organisation see the direct consequences of the actions/enforcement re lockdown and how this changes matters for the vulnerable in a very significant way regards their health and wellbeing.

Remove/reduce care and the people giving care in a significant way and the vulnerable, those with serious underlying conditions die in greater numbers, when the elastic was already over stretched it's obvious there was going to be a significant effect due to the actions/reactions. Induce fear in the vulnerable/those with serious health conditions such that they don't seek help and this means more deaths.

Do you accept the words of the governments own adviser regarding the majority of deaths of people whose conditions were so severe their outcome would not change whether they had a virus or not?

Whichever way people's thoughts are and how you look at data we need to address the fallout, we as individuals cannot make inroads into how government do things in reality. And addressing the fallout is for here at least how we keep a hold of the sport, the clubs, employees and how we can improve things on the back of a jolt that might make certain parties wake and take action for the better of the sport. And that discussion be for all that are connected to it, fans, players, owners, administrators, sponsors, media and any other associated parties.

I replied to a post suggesting vaccines as a solution (from a company well know to be bascially dodgy AF), i didn't sign up just to respond to that, it just happened to be at the top of the threads.
I came here to discuss rugby and how we can move forward re the club and rugby as a whole, maybe leaving C.19 discussion, vaccines/treatments could be left to AOB/tea Room/politics and we chat about the sport/clubs/sporting events and dealing with what 'we' do and can control or have input into and just have that in the rugby chat section?

I disagree with several of your points, but I do agree on not getting bogged down further with this here.

So, rugby. Even if they get back to playing behind closed doors by mid-summer, I’m thinking now that a ‘full’ SL season is not feasible, even scrapping loop fixtures. It’d be a real shame to discount the games played to date (even as a fan of club that has lost 5 of 6 in the league), and that complicates any restructure.

The other big question is, even with the breathing space of the government loans, how on Earth do clubs plan for 2021?

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 5:30 pm  

If fans cant go to games then surely more will subscribe to Sky Sports so Sky could potentially pay more? But then with no season ticket sales and crowds being unable to attend i can see how teams can survive anyway

Re: Contract Talks & FCs Future : Sun May 10, 2020 5:55 pm  

Even if the season resumes at the beginning of July which is very optimistic then we'll have eleven games to reschedule (not including Magic or the Challenge Cup). Other clubs are even further behind - Catalans have only played four games, three others have played just five.

Fitting all these fixtures in this year will be nigh on impossible without playing twice a week every week. If we get going at all the Super League season will have to be scrapped and perhaps create two groups of six with clubs playing home and away - although of course Catalans add a further complication as do Toronto who may have to play 'home' games as double headers with other games.