Superunknown

Squiggle now has us 3rd, playing Bulldogs in Qualifying Final, if losing that, playing the Swans at the G, if winning that, Lions at the Gabba in a PF. Top 2 is just so important. From Fox Footy - lots of media now saying "where is Ben Brown?!" MELBOURNE After a red-hot start to the season, cracks are starting to appear for the Demons, who were knocked off from first place on the ladder. Their loss to GWS on Saturday marked their second defeat from their last three games, while last week’s win over Essendon was far from convincing. There is a bit for coach Simon Goodwin to work on as the AFL world will now ponder if they peaked too early this season. Alas, they remain second on the ladder, although their spot in the top four is far from locked away. In the votes Christian Petracca tried his heart out, finishing with 30 disposals, 10 marks and six tackles. Christian Salem was also his usual busy self across halfback, tallying 31 disposals at 83 per cent efficiency plus 10 marks and one goal. The defensive pairing of Steven May and Jake Lever also continues to be a juggernaut and near impenetrable wall for opposition to get past. Bayley Fritsch finished with a team-high three goals and nearly single-handedly got Melbourne back in the game in the fourth quarter. Room for improvement The Demons’ inability to produce big scores or put teams away is now potentially becoming an issue. It marked Melbourne’s third-straight game where they haven’t scored over 70 points, while they haven’t reached the triple-figure mark since Round 7. It is surely time to inject Ben Brown into the side, who was recruited to give them more firepower up forward, or recall Sam Weideman and stick with. Either way, Fritsch was their only damaging forward against GWS as Tom McDonald was held goalless, showing they need more support in attack. Grade C

Post of the year

True the problem is we are looking like wasting the incredible start

I’ve been in panic mode since round 2

There is a very real chance we finish ex top 4 and exit week 1….

In- straight kicking

Pfizer in Vic apparently and Pfizer for under 40s nationwide

EOCY21

I like this

Super! Thanks for posting Sue. Two takeaways - 1. What FITB said - we'll be <in Team America Voice) Unstoppable, Gary. 2. Look at our scoring range v top 8 and bottom 8. We're consistent AF. Does that mean we're more reliable / less flat track bully? I'm not sure, but I thought asking this question would make me look like I might have some semblance of knowing WTF I was on about which on reflection may not be the case.

For those wondering about vaccine availability:

Paging @Yokozuna - any intel on Lipinski or Richards (I saw someone mentioned we might be into Lipinksi a while ago IIRC?). https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/clubs-circling-bulldog-lipinski-20210630-p585ou.html

Quality post. Murray gets paid to get eyeballs and to do that he stirs the pot of the angry right. It's that simple. 1. Paul and Peter are not the best political media figures in Australia. Maybe if you're a "rightist" - since you seem fond of lashing out with binary labels. 2. Because the Murdoch mafia and their IPA allies (along with the Innes Willox's of the world) aren't media sycophantic allies to the right? 3. Citation required on: - lockdown fatigue, by country - business closure, in AU (ProfitKeeper says hi) - mortgage defaults in AU (hint - little to no change thanks to JK and super withdrawals and bank mortgage holidays) - divorce rates (it's telling that you have positioned divorce as "wife losing")

The Murdoch media is also full of zealots - it depends on your perspective, don't you think? Me, I'm an by-the-issues person,. so I see zealotry on both sides, including in the ABC. Defunding the ABC is not going to solve the problem, and usually is a good marker for IPA-aligned thinking. This point serves as a useful strawman for Murray's ideology, but it's not useful until such time as most of the population is vaccinated and the borders are open. Posters here have made that point, as have health experts, so if one chooses to ignore this point, so be it.

I always like to start with statistical probability. Squiggle has us finishing first (up from IIRC 2nd last week). Matter of stats has us as 91% and 88% chance of top 4, depending on the number of simulations. http://www.matterofstats.com/mafl-simulations/2021-simulating-the-final-ladder-after-round-14. 30-35% chance of 1st.

Can you explain why this is an issue? The AMA, Hunt, QLD CHO, the NSW CHO (implicitly), have all recommended following current health advice informed by ATAGI. Here is the current ATAGI advice, dated 17 June 2021: link

For what little my opinion is worth: Procurement - picking AZ due to the political connection between Morrison and one of the execs at AZ. Rejecting Pfizer and Moderna's offers last year (July) of priority access to whatever volume we needed and waiting till Oct to order Pfizer. Novavax still not ready. Should have signed as many deals as possible to mitigate risk. Rollout - should have handed over to the states. The C'th is not in the business of logistics, they're funders. Look how organised NSWH is. The feds still cannot get RACF, quarantine/transport workers, vaccinated. Total shambles. "I don't hold the needle mate". Messaging has been an absolute case study in how not to do public health messaging. A useful way to categorise people is: understandably hesitant (note; poor messaging/constant changing), the normal wait-and-see, those who simply can't get Pfizer (there are a lot), those who are ineligible (under 40s for Pfizer). Deaths/hospitalisations will be reported once a substantial proportion are vaccinated. At present, with low vax rates, cases are more useful as a pointer to risk.

Agree on broader point, it is a telling vignette, but you're right, doesn't take into account confounding variables, health factors, heterogeneity etc. On compulsory - not sure my opinion is all that important but since you asked - I think you can make a good case for compulsory vaccination in certain settings, particularly where there are alternative placement options for those who don't want to. ie in health you can take people off frontline/their substantive role and put them in admin. Same for airlines. RACF is a bit harder with limited back office roles (I think?) and I think I heard the relevant union is about to test that case. Another issue is Morrison's diktat/edict that all RACF must be vaccinated by Sept - as Shergold on RN Breakfast said this morning - that's ok but where is the Pfizer supply (as most of the workers in RACF are under 60). Good example of another Morrison announceable running ahead of the practicalities. The complicating factor here is a lack of a no fault compensation scheme for those who are compelled/or wish to have AZ. I can understand the reticence and such a scheme might provide some more comfort to those. There are other levers to pull for rates - I like Qantas' FF points/reward announcement for those vaccinated. I think you could consider only letting those who were vaccinated attend certain events (eg Bluesfest, bigger weddings) or venues (bars etc) have some more freedoms in restrictions (ie I need to get to Ray Drummond at Burleigh for new clubs ;D )....

England, UK, Spain, Italy etc?

I don't think n=30 and n=6 is a particularly compelling sample size: a biostatistician may wish to correct me there though.

The better way to look at this is the health advice has changed based on first overseas, and then local, data with respect to adverse reactions. The initial advice obviously is informed by trials and OS data, until we get local data. Of course, the political messaging and parsing of the health advice is an entirely separate matter. You'll note that the health advice has not changed - Pfizer recommended for under 60s. But, if after being properly informed of the risks, an under 60 elects to receive AZ, then they can do so.

MFC: Russell Howcroft - adman and ex channel 10 GM (have a listen to the recent hamish and andy bit on hamish trying to become friends with Russell)

Age footy podcast contemplated this in latest one.....

Delta has an R0 between 5 and 6. Without a very substantial proportion being vaccinated, the risk without lockdowns/controls/restrictions falls on very large numbers and hospitalisations. AFAICT, the calculus has not changed since last year as we don't have a large proportion vaccinated. Looking at it the other way, if you let this thing run (ref: Sweden) and lots of people die/end up in hospital (affecting provision of other services) which probably leads to stricter/long term lockdowns, what would you prefer. Not defending decisions, just laying down some probable rationale... PS: there is already an acknowledgement that once most of us are vaccinated and borders open the focus will change to hospitalisations and not new cases/case numbers.

Depends how things track on the GC - no new cases in Vic. For selfish reasons I'd love it at Metricon (I'm an hour away in NNSW and haven't been to a game for a lonnng time) but for team first, at the G also good.