No, hes just a talented youngster who has succumbed to rigours of having to compete with battle hardened players every week.
Sam walsh is the exception not the rule. We play our kids with blokes who are broken down most of the time, so its no wonder they display patchy form.
People were very quick to pot Casboult based on his limitations, but they failed to be cogniscent of the fact, that our forward line functioned better with him in there, than without him, and that despite his limitations he is competing at each and every contest (rightly or wrongly) and De Koning is simply not at that level yet.
This is where we are falling over. We are picking blokes based on potential, and they all have something worth persisting with, but they are physically unready to compete each week and produce their best footy.
This is a KPI of why our team isnt doing better in games IMHO. It actually is more to do with the ability to compete for 4 quarters each and every week and its got to do with our list composition.
Its why dropping the senior players is quite stupid. They are 24/7 footballers, and whilst they could use the odd freshen up, I think they are being dropped to solidify their standing in the group, rather than anything else.
Parks is a VFL player and Martin on Whitfield was a dumb move given Whitfield runs all day. I would have played Cottrell on Whitfield as he has the pace and endurance and has done the job before. Whitfield hates a hard tag and that isn't Martins game at all as he was recruited to be creative and provide some goals, not sit on a bloke who needs an endurance type of tagger.
As much as I agree with this, Martin is a player that could play the Whitfield role, and it might have been a good learning opportunity for him to understand what it takes to break a game open.
He can do it, but based on what I heard on a podcast this morning, I think there is a lot our players are not owning which is likely more to do with why we are under performing as a unit.
Thryleon, it seems to me that you aren’t proposing a response which is much different from the status quo. You are really proposing a number of tweaks, many of which I wouldn’t oppose.
I agree that the 14 day quarantine is a bit arbitrary and is a bit of a compromise between public safety and individual freedom. Frequent post-release testing would be sensible, especially as there’s a risk of being infected in hotel quarantine while exiting. But keeping track of those who have just been released would be a challenge as they’d no doubt feel like their lives have been upended enough at that stage. Again, testing queues are a compromise required to ensure a sufficient volume of tests: bookings and staggered entry would be ideal, of course. Football games are moved to avoid crowd less games: bad for TV coverage and a loss at the gate. And if they’re played in a Covid hotspot, opposing teams may be unable or unwilling to come and incur quarantine restrictions. But I wouldn’t be against your proposals.
It really does come down to whether a possible outbreak should trigger tight restrictions until the extent of infections is known and addressed. NSW will indeed be interesting in this regard.
But for me vaccinations are the key. I don’t have a problem with opening up when we’re approaching herd immunity and everyone has had the opportunity to be fully vaccinated (i.e. both doses). But we’re nowhere near that. For instance, I’ve only had the 1 dose and that gives me only a 33% chance of resisting infection but the 2nd dose in August will increase that to 60-90%.
The main point of difference is when.
The main point of difference is that I think we've gone too hard too early.
If you were placed in charge, how would you deal with Covid without resorting to restrictions? Would you just trust that there’d be no spike in infections? Perhaps you wouldn’t care whether one occurred because it’s no big deal? But what would you do?
It’s easy to fixate on the costs of a course of action if you don’t have to worry about proposing alternatives. For instance, funding the military in Australia is a massive cost. There isn’t anyone trying to invade us now and absent the arrival of white colonists we’ve never been invaded before. So we could save a lot of money by disbanding the military.
I'd stage the imposition of restrictions so that things continue relatively as normal until otherwise required, and am watching NSW with intrigue. My assumption is that they will get on top of this relatively quickly. The data shows 32 positive cases over 7 days for over 160 000 tests. The latest 10 are all close contacts and household members of those already positive. Which means, that their response is so far commensurate with the risk.
Seperate to that, I would be imposing practical safe guards to prevent outbreaks from growing before they begin in a future state to try and keep normality normal for as long as possible. Regular testing of someone coming out of hotel quarantine is a requirement for one month post quarantine.
I have witnessed lines of people waiting to get tested where they are all in each others faces, and there is no booking system for a test. Implement one, so that way you know who is coming where and when, rather than seeing a bunch of people standing around waiting to get tested. Yes, walk ins are ok, but Ive seen more scope for spread waiting to be tested than in a lot of places, and that was including during our big outbreaks last year.
I wouldn't be cancelling all the elective surgeries at the first sign of outbreak, because we should have mandatory testing for those going in for elective surgery. No negative test, no surgery and that continues irrespective of outbreak landscape to ensure that surgery and health care workers are protected. Cancelling all non essential surgeries at the first sign of outbreak, is problematic for a whole host of reasons, and I see no reason why they were cancelled recently.
The rules about new born dads only having 1 hour a day with mum and new born during out breaks is stupid and should be removed irrespective of outbreak. Let them have a test in the lead up to birth, and then you can be somewhat sure about their covid free state (and if unwell dont come at all, your new born will thank you later). I know of one infant in NICU who's parents were both allowed to visit seperately for less than 1 hour at a time.... Useless. They are more likely to walk out, catch covid, and then walk back in with it, than they are to go in and stay in for the day.
Schools continue until outbreaks implicate those students, and then into isolation unless wider restrictions result in more online learning.
Footy plays on with or without fans, as scheduled. The players are subjected to regular covid tests, and for the most part, should be playing on irrespective of covid state. The fact that there is this big rush to "get out" wreaks of stupidity as once we declare a lockdown, the point is to catch positive people before they run off, so the big rush to leave results in a potentially quick and large spread, instead of encouraging good behaviours. Result more spread, not less.
QR codes.... What is the point in QR coding people at a service station to fill up their car? They spend more time qr coding than they do with the attendant and that just makes people hang around longer. Practicality should trump the necessity to record things for the sake of it.
I am not advocating free movement of everyone, but there are better ways to do this than simply lock everyone up in a panic. I am not even privy to the information that they all have to come up with some of this stuff because I am aware that the government knows more than it tells its people. Gladys not locking down is a tell in itself that this one will fizzle out.
What I do know, is that the mandatory testing of front liners is wanting. I know at the airport and in the health care networks the tests are not happening to the staff that are required. The mask wearing is something that lacks common sense. If you walk into a hospital as a staff member, that just put a mask on in the car, they require you change it in the hospital.
Quantitive and Qualitative risk analysis is missing from a lot of our measures. I can go to a restaurant with 100 strangers where we all eat maskless, but I cannot go to a wedding with 100 people whom I know, and whom are more likely to avoid going if unwell because they dont want to kill aunty ruby (or maybe they do, but thats beside the point).
I went to a christening of twins in Feb. Over 100 people, not one chance of catching covid even though we were in restrictions a week later.
We make vaccines available. AZ, Pfizer, whatever. We tell everyone exactly what the hold up is, why its taking so long, and then at some point when everyone has had access to a vaccine, and declined to take it we let it rip until things get out of hand and we can revert back to controlling its spread again.
We are going to have periods where there is overlap between vaccine where people are at risk, but I can tell you now, that the administration of vaccines in the hospital is on a first come first serve basis. You walk in as a health care worker and you get one, irrespective of whether you are a cleaner or a surgeon because they didnt both prioritising. The fact they are discouraging too many from one department to go at one time, and to go just before a break between shifts is an indicator, that they know about side effects and the illness and sick leave caused by it. If people are refusing vaccines, well, statistics are statistics. You would feel pretty bloody stupid getting a disease you could have protected yourself against if it has a bad outcome attached, and thats a learning opportunity for the anti vax movement that will help us all in the long run so perhaps natural selection will work for the greater good there.
You know, I look abroad and we have been given a lot of hyperbole about this disease, and yet we dont have a 3rd world health care system, we dont even have a risk averse approach to covid (if IT issues occur, the IT guys go into the covid ward which is a massive tell about the covid risk because why would you send someone in if it was truly dangerous who doesn't need to go in, particularly for a mundane issue like one workstation offline or to install a fax machine when papers can be passed around quite easily or revert to electronic documentation, but I digress).
I dont speak from a position of not seeing some of the hypocrisy up close and personal, which means either the hospital workers are cognisent of the risk, and then take more risks than necessary anyway (doubtful) or the risk isnt as great as we are being told about, and the news out there is to encourage people to limit their stupidity outside of covid infection, in case they become the super spreader you guys describe.
Since covid started, I lead a rather simple existence. Catch ups with different families are a fortnight apart, just in case you only hit my side or my mrs side. We generally do grocery shopping, and stay at home activities where possible unless we need something else.
Doesn't that depend on where you are and when, go somewhere the health system is over run to reconfirm that and the story might be very different.
It seems our health system isn't over-run because of the aggressive restrictions, not in spite of them!
And I'll reiterate, COVID deaths are only one measure, long COVID is going to become a much bigger issue if effective treatments are not found. If the restrictions and lockdowns buy time to develop those treatments, then that is probably a good thing.
If too many 20 somethings get heart or kidney disease, that's a lifetime of care dollar$ we will all be subsidising, it is not an insignificant risk!
Our health system has never really been under pressure to date, even with the 100's of cases per day.
The lockdowns have caused more grief through the baby boom we are currently experiencing for the health services than covid ever caused.
That could change, but whilst we remain on the path to elimination it wont.
Interesting you say that GTC as I was listening to the radio this morning on 3AW at 7:25am, there is a jerno, forget his name and he quoted Scott Drapper from Essendon, who said that Dow roved to him during lockdown, in a scratch match that was organised between 3 clubs, Carlton, Essendon and the Swans. He said, of Dow, that he thought he was one of the better midfielders that he has seen and played with currently in the AFL.
You can read the report in the link below. O'keefe highlights Dow and Kennedy output.
Mav, the message behind what im saying isn't political.
Covid is a disease that isn't cutting people down the way we were first told it would.
We'll see what happens in NSW from here but I see them a bit slower to go into meltdown and lock everyone down.
The point to showing hungary was that despite a global pandemic people are willing to go to a game that they are allowed to in numbers.
This isn't a worry for them on a people level.
The populace is where you see the trouble not in government strategy. Crowds attending games in their droves even in a nation with over 800k positive cases.
Its a tell.
Whether or not you equate that to letting it rip or not is a different story but letting it rip doesn't mean everyone has to go out it. Just means that people can make the choice to.
For starters we should be playing footy in empty stadoums as scheduled rather than seeing the afl swing around frantically trying to reschedule games.
Whether or not crowds can attend can be subject to vaccination, a negative test, online booking for tickets, temperature checks etc. Instead we get low rates of transmission become shut all borders from midnight tomorrow night rather than implement some rules that are easy to maintain with or without outbreaks that are able to see some semblance of normality resume.