binman

And if said person is actually a dees fans then that sad existence goes to a whole other level!

There is a suggestion that 3 of the initial 5 cases were eligible to have had a vaccine but hadn't had one. It would also appear one of them (the so called case 5 - a 60 year old fella) was the first link in the chain and then infected two households (not to mention being out and about in the community for a week while infectious). One of the people this fella (case 5) infected in his household then infected five people at his workplace. If he had had a vaccine then there is very good chance he would not have got infected in the first place and therefore would not have passed it on to anyone else. And we would not be talking about lockdowns and missing the footy on Friday night. Or thousands and thousands of people having to down tools and waste hours to get a cotton bud stuck up their nose. And of course all the other major disruptions to people's lives And it beggars belief, if true, but it is being reported that one of the older infected person's doctor did a house call (coz they were sick). And the doctor was also unvaccinated. Jesus wept But hey, as long at the 70 year old fella in his 'safe' suburb is ok then all good.

Which is why i refuse to take the contraceptive pill

So much for the Australian spirit of community and looking after each other. I'm alright jack should be our national motto

Agree our approach to covid was first class. Our approach to vaccination has been anything but.

And And a national embarrassment. There was such a smugness about out response to COVID, particularly in comparison to that of the United states and the UK. Well the states has now hit 50% of the adult population vaccinated mark. Meaning only 20% more to get to herd immunity. And the UK is arounds that mark too i think. Both countries will be on the other side of this before we will. Which is just absurd We had time, the systems and vaccines. We should have hit the herd immunity mark by now for god's sake. We can blame the politicians all we like but we should collectively asking why we haven't and why there has not been a massive push from the community to have done so. I guarantee if Morrison thought failing to reach herd immunity would costs them the next election the feds would have made it priority number one - which of course it should have been anyway!.

I don't think that's the case actually. I think, but stand to be corrected, thst informed consent is a blanket statement that atm applies only to people under 50 AND eligible to get a vaccination (1a, 1b frontline workers etc). But under 50s will be able to get it here in a matter of weeks I reckon

If you fall into 1a or 1b yes. If not, the vic government is pushing to open availability to everyone. As the federal government should have done from the start. A total joke. So very, very soon you will have the opportunity to get an AZ vaccination shot.

I thought you can still get az if you are under 50. If you want to. And really I don't understand why anyone wouldn't Its just thst it is recommendation not to. But discuss with your doc

That peanut really helped thinngs with one of those 10 million announcements. Basically telling people over 50 to chill, no hurry to get the cheap, cask wine blood clot vaccine. Just wait until the top shelf, grange one is available around Xmas. Or next year. Or mid next year. Anyone would think they are quite happy to ride the whe're an island, we're ok, keep the borders closed, nationalistic sentiment all the way to the next election. All the while bagging the states about border closures (bad for business apparently - but closing the national border isn't. Strange). And doing sweet fa about sorting an effective national quarantine response. Rhyming slang comes to mind.

Except it want covid symptoms they asked you to monitor. They're concerned the game was so boring they have asked patrons to monitor for ongoing symptoms of ennui.

Lucky it wasn't a dees game. Because people actually turn up to our games!

I'll get there 3 hours before the game starts!

Too late OD - i'm fully woke.

First dose fine. Largely becuase i've only had my first one. Second one next week A letter from your doc or some other formal proof. Incentivize and reward. And I can yell and support with others who have done the right thing and had their shot(s) and not have to worry (well 72% of not worry) about all the possible covid carrying delaying dees and dogs fans cramping my style. And less young bucks who can't handle their grog and are desperate to impose themselves on the rest of us. Perfect.

They should make tickets available for people who have been vaccinated. And only for people who have been vaccinated.

There won't be a lockdown. Games will go ahead. There will be crowds.

Demonland's very own lace out (and skipper of an excellent you tube channel and podcast) is referenced in this article. Love the title: https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/borders-on-cheating-melbourne-fail-to-win-two-crucial-free-kicks-in-shock-one-point-loss-to-adelaide-ng-b881879550z?dc_data=6594903_samsung-carnival-australia-english&utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral&ui=d0d9279a-60d8-4e2f-b351-7f38ba6bb02a-tuct7a5dc37

A very misleading stat. Because it is easy to assume turnovers as result from an error from us. Still a horrible number but.

Ta. In that sense those three stats are better as indicators of things are teams are doing well, or symptoms of things they are doing poorly. So the crow's high score from turnover is an indicator their pressure was good and symptom of our not being as good and our poor defensive running (an other things no doubt too eg good skills). I reckon it might also point to a backline that was a bit out of kilter. They didn't replace Salem with a like for like (ie a distributor replaced by a lockdown small defender) and they played Petty in a different role (ie up the ground as opposed to the goal keeper role). So when they won the ball back from us, our zones and defensive structures were not as well organized as they usually are.

That is super high. Our average opposition score was something like 61 points prior to this game. And we conceded 76 points from turnovers alone. I'm not sure how they define a turnover (frustration #6543 with how the game us covered) but I'm assuming it is any time where we have clear possession and they win it back. So not just clangers. There must be heaps of turnovers in any given game. No doubt speaks to how fierce at the contest they were, their ability to transition the ball and getting clean entries. The first speaks to our pressure the latter two things our average defensive running and spread.

Exactly. Which is why they were able to transition so much more easily than other opponents - particularly though the corridor Add pressure levels that were not up to the required level until part way through the last quarter and you get clean entries. And the highest score kicked in against us this season. Add some accurate kicking from them, some poor defensive efforts (why was none in Walker's leading lanes x 2), some costly fumbles (eg tracc on the wing in the last) and some dubious decision that cost goals (non deliberate, deliberate against us x 2, soft in the back against lever, rubbish 50 and the non htb against keays). Ans most of all add a young team who played with spirit and fire and took risks. Put it all together and you get a one point loss. Not to mention a cracking game. At least for neutrals. When it is all said and done nothing to die in a ditch over. We should have played tempo one we got the 16 point lead. And the quick goal from the centre to walker was poor defensively. Of course you want the 4 points, but I do wonder if squeezing home in that game might have allowed some players to think the pressure and defensive running was OK. A loss takes that off the table and none one needs to tell them if the crows can beat them by applying more pressure (which accross the game they did - i reckon we only ever matched them at best and then only for 15 mins in rhe last) the dogs will destroy them.

I thought they way they set up was really strange to be honest. And made life more difficult for Petty as a result. The structure we have run with for well over two years has been Omac, then Tomo as the deep full back/goal keeper, with May and Lever playing higher. Petty replaced Tomlinson and took over that role, which is how he played against the swans and the blues. But against the crows they put Petty on Walker when he left the forward line and May played deep. It is too early for them to be playing around with roles in terms of Petty bedding down his role. May should have been on Walker the whole match and followed him whenever he left the 50 metre arc leaving Petty deep as the sweeper. Sure the crows would have tried to engineer Petty on Walker deep in that scenario. And i get that they probably were happy enough to have Walker on the wing against Petty, even if he was out marking him, as he is not kicking goals from there and they would have thought May and Gawn would then be more of weapon. But in doing so they disrupted the systems and defensive synergy and exposed Petty to being out marked to boot. And to make matters worse may had his worst game for the season, and was not an offensive threat at all, and max wasn't taking his marks. They should have just keep things simple and stuck with their go to structure.

Has to be bowey. If fit enough I can only assume they didn't think bowey was ready after his injury break. Otherwsie, surely he was the logical replacement for Salem Assuming that to be the case i understand, sort of, why they went with Nev's, becuase he is experience and is pretty accurate and reliable kick, which with Hunt and Rivers is important as both are hit and miss coming out of defence. But unfortunate Jetts look a liability when dragged out of the back 50 and is not a ditibutor like Salem. So not a like for like. I would have preferred them putting Jordon in Salem's position and bringing Captain Jack Sparrow in to play Vice Captain Jack's inside mid role. JJ is looking a bit weary and struggled to hit targets again playing an inside mid. Playing him at half back would not be as taxing, and if you look at his heat maps round 1 -8 that's essentially where he played. He is an excellent kick, makes good decisions, is good defensively, is a good tackler and can get up the ground - all key elements of Salem's game. And a fresh Captain Jack would have brought a ferocity and willingness to apply pressure we lacked.

How we are playing is completely different discussion. This thread is about the umpires getting it blatantly wrong. It is not about whether the blatant error cost us the game. Which by the by, is by no means certain it did. Lets say Spargo got the free for deliberate. He might have tried a banana and hit the wrong side of the ball and missed everything. Unlikely, but possible.