Nibor

People use the word flu pretty casually, mostly when they have some other virus that manifests as a cold. One of the actual strains of influenza will generally knock you on your ass (bedridden) for a week or more. The jab is for the particular strains of influenza that look to be prevalent this year and is low efficacy - seen numbers like 60-70%. It's given to people at risk of complications to reduce the strain on the NHS, brutally it's an economic thing, there's no real hope of inoculating influenza out of existence. So, if someone had a jab and then had a flu like illness it could be another virus altogether, a strain of influenza that wasn't covered by the jab, or the jab could just have not worked for them.

Not for a moment, at least not whilst there's no scientific evidence for the theory. There's a spike in flu like illnesses over winter every year, so anecdotal evidence of people being ill in winter doesn't mean much at all. If there had been a new easily transmissible virus with a > 1% mortality rate doing the rounds since November I think it would be very visible in national statistics and have been noticed.

What is hard to understand? The media are using the word coronavirus to refer to COVID-19 because they are sloppy. They are not reporting that he has some other virus from the same family. I don't know why you'd come to the conclusion that a media that has been thoroughly incompetent at science reporting for decades is suddenly accurate!

I don't think anybody is reporting viruses unrelated to the present epidemic as though they are and I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that is what is happening. They're just being sloppy with naming.

If we're going to be fussy about terminology, COVID-19 refers to the disease (symptoms) in the present epidemic caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2 which is a member of the group of coronaviruses. The chap referred to here has the disease COVID-19 according to the statement from Arsenal.

Yeah I think that just brought forward the inevitable to be honest and probably saved the public purse a bit on bailout.

I used to work in a large plc where there were some people who were expected to be in the office and others who had a lot more freedom. What tended to happen was that every Friday you'd get a flurry of emails from the people in the latter group who were "working from home" at 9am, they'd be uncontactable all day and then you'd see another email or two at sort of 4:30 just to bookend the day nicely so that nobody thought they were skiving. Then you'd notice on their facebook they were somehow on a weekend away at 5pm having miraculously travelled six hours in a few short minutes... In hindsight that company had a really shitty culture which was the real problem but that sort of thing really turned me off letting people work from home. It took me a while to come around to letting people work more flexibly where I'm at now, but when it goes hand in hand with a decent culture it really does work. People have coughs and colds they just work from home and I don't lose half the team to man flu over the next week. People need to go to an appointment, want some quiet desk time to do something or want to skive off early on a Friday that's fine, but if we need someone to fix something in the evening that's also fine. It's all co-ordinated in a messenger app, people write stuff down and use teleconf and desktop sharing software if they need to and it seems to work. I actually find myself telling people to work from home fairly often and when we have things like coronavirus and our clients ask what the disaster recovery / business continuity plans are our answer is "we can operate fully remotely on zero notice". Saves a lot of ball ache.

Mortality rate is about the same, there are far fewer cases though so likely it's harder to transmit and care is far better now than 100 years ago. It may yet be that this becomes a pandemic but so far it's looking hopeful as recoveries are happening much faster than new cases at the moment.

AJ gets hit a fair bit. Wilder hits a lot harder than Ruiz, Klitschko, Povetkin or Takam did. Does he have the discipline to fight from distance like he did against Ruiz the second time? Not for 12 rounds IMO, especially since he doesn't really have a reach advantage. Can he dominate Wilder on the front foot like Fury? I expect he will get hit too much to do that. AJ is a better boxer than Wilder but nowhere as as good at movement as Fury. I think AJ vs Wilder just comes down to who connects first. Be fun to watch.

Never saw that coming, absolutely fantastic from Fury. And he tasted blood!

So about 6!

Last time round Fury outlanded Wilder in 9 of 12 rounds - not by much each time but by enough that judges pretty much anywhere else in the world would have given him the win. I think the talk of Fury going for a KO is just an attempt to mislead people, he'd be mad to risk getting hit. His best bet is to follow the same game plan as last time just do it better.

I'd go two for thirty two there to be fair.

Rocky III basically, well aside from the KO.

http://crackstreams.ga/boxingstreams/watch-dazn-ruiz-vs-joshua/video.php

Spelling. Looks legit.

I thought a Tillson was £400k but it turns out they're even cheaper than I remember.

Dunno, I'm only talking about transfer fees there - we have a bigger than £20m a season wage bill and the club's income from regular business doesn't cover it so it's not a straightforward question. I would think there's room for a couple more signings (if Webster goes then maybe a couple more) but because FFP works on a rolling three year period I don't think they will blow it all in one season and leave no room for manoeuvre the following year.

It's a significant investment. The more telling point is that after paying £7m for Kalas, £2m for Dasilva, £750k for Smodicz and maybe £3m for Bentley we are still £2.25m in the black from transfer fees given we got £15m from Kelly. So we can afford to spunk 17.5 Tillsons on the best defender in the Championship. Must make both their brain cells ache.

My experience is that the moral thing often comes into it in business - in fact more often than not. Often that's for reasons of reputation rather than for the sake of it but it's still an important decision making factor. So whilst it's not a surprise that Cardiff try and find a way to wriggle out of it, it is still wrong and should not be excused or even misconstrued as common or normal.

Saying "it's business" is an awful excuse. It's not OK for business to act immorally for financial reasons and it never has been. Many businesses make decisions for reasons other than purely monetary ones, and in this case that's what should have been done. After all it is Cardiff's dodgy clique of agents and their families that arranged this flight, no fault of Nantes. I hope FIFA throw the book at them.

Absolutely no integrity or class as per usual.

There's no explanation for that except bribery. None whatsoever.

I don't understand what Rocky's plan was there... use my reach to my advantage by sitting on the ropes soaking up body shots? Seems a bit odd.