italian dave
-
Posts
16031 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Events
Posts posted by italian dave
-
-
4 minutes ago, pl00peh91 said:
You’d have to question in that case why NP decided to disclose this in his presser, other than to perhaps trigger a bidding war well before the transfer window shuts?
I can see the point of triggering a bidding war but surely there are other ways to do that. I just think that where it’s known that a player wants away that removes a card from his current club’s hand.
But I’m sure NP has more experience of this than me!
Perhaps he could have done with the advice of a seasoned wheeler dealer, someone like….Mark Ashton - only joking !
-
19 minutes ago, MC RISK77 said:
Fingers crossed he goes- may get some money to boost the coffers for the striker we desperately need
Sadly though, if he’s asked to leave that will probably reduce his value.
-
26 minutes ago, Alessandro said:
A performance that probably sums up where we are right now.
Decent and well organised, we’ll create chances, but will need to create a lot given we look pretty toothless up front.
Defence is a concern. We will have games where we’ll hang on for a win and times when we won’t, like this afternoon.
Mid-table stuff, better if we can fix either the conversion rate or chances conceded. Worse if we don’t.
Work to be done.
I share that concern about the defence. We failed to pick up runners, gave away sill free kicks (in positions we conceded from so many times last year), failed to be first to the ball, and got away with it because they weren’t great in the final third. Against better sides we’d have been punished.
-
1 hour ago, LondonBristolian said:
Article in the Guardian today. Highlight is these three paragraphs:
“Ashton scrolls through his phone and locates a picture of a placard bearing the words “Run towards adversity”, surrounded by signatures. He asked Ipswich’s players, a largely new team after a summer of sweeping change, to “sign it in blood” after a meeting last week. The phrase relates to the challenges faced by the firefighters and rescue workers whose contributions will directly fund the club’s ambition.
“They have to run into burning fires, towards bullets, towards danger,” he says. “The only thing the pension fund have asked me is that, if you join this club, every time you go to work you run towards adversity and tackle the challenge head on. The players represent the fans and the community, but they represent those people as well.
“After it was presented to them, one of the squad went up to my director of performance, Andy Rolls, and said: ‘I owe you an apology, my running stats were down yesterday and I didn’t put in the effort I should have. It won’t happen again.’”Are you trying to spoil my evening?!! As if reminders of Ashton and Rolls weren’t enough, up pops Russell Osman
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, CyderInACan said:
understand the point re streaming on a Saturday but the clubs quite simply need bums on seats, selling pies, pints and programmes to get the pound notes flowing back into the coffers. In the absence of any further lockdown(s) I cant see the restrictions on streaming blackouts being lifted (albeit there is still always the option for anyone, ahem, abroad to stream all games for £140/season)
I guess the risk for the club is that those three bums on seats, buying their pies and pints, and going to the toilet, results in 30 fewer bums on seats etc the next game, because they're at home with covid. But I doubt they'll see it like that!
You'd have thought it possible to restrict access codes to streaming to those who've got match tickets - but I can see that gets time consuming and like you cant see restrictions being lifted otherwise.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:
Wow.
2 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:Wow.
Fair play….s/he can’t be accused of not putting their money where their mouth is.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, pride of the west said:
He'd need to knock out a horse before they'd take notice.
They’d put him in their hall of fame for that.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, BS2 Red said:
Wrong.
Mmmmmm……compulsory vaccination….now there’s an idea
-
-
A couple of newspaper headline this today - not sure whether there's anything in it, or it belongs in the 'irresponsible headlines' thread?
-
9 minutes ago, myol'man said:
So that the rest of don't have to sit next to @Riaz or any of the other anti-vaxers, perhaps City could have an 'anti-vaxers section' along the lines of the 'singing section' . Maybe right up in the far corner of the Upper Lansdown.
Oh, and make them wear a bell around their neck?
I like the idea of an anti-vaxxers section towards which, even into which, Nakhi Wells could run to celebrate scoring.
-
3
-
-
11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:
I was quite outspoken before, and took some time off to reflect about that. Stand by my opposition to Vaccine Passports but...
- Lateral flow tests x 2 per week? Need for work, so yes. Since first week of May.
- Do I isolate if Test and Trace get in touch? Absolutely.
- Do I isolate if anyone I am with reports that they or the group had symptoms? Absolutely.
- Do I isolate if symptoms? Absolutely.
- Do I isolate if Positive LFT? Absolutely.
- Wear Masks in store and other necessary indoor settings? Yep.
- Sanitise in and out of stores and other buildings? Yep.
That's just off the top of my head. Other bits? I expect so.
NHS App sounds significantly oversensitive and anyway my phone and Apps don't mesh well, whether it would be any point in me downloading to my current phone, doubt it.
Vaccine Passports though...just feels a bridge too far- think @Baba Yaga makes a strong point, the goalposts keep moving. Perhaps some of it is due to scientific necessity and a prior optimism bias, but it also feels like mission creep- slippery slope, precedent etc.
First it was 3 weeks to normal. Then it was 3 months to turn the tide- but fair enough I accept.
Early Circuit breaker might have meant less harsh lockdown later, only time will tell or it may just have delayed the inevitable- who knows for sure?
The bigger worry for me though is..."No vaccine passports" "No vaccine passports" "No vaccine passports"...
...Freedom Day arrives...come Teatime "Vaccine Passports for Nightclubs"- and probably other crowded venues too.
The sudden ruling out of other alternatives, such as Lateral Flow Testing and I heard unless I missed it, no mention of Natural Immunity- presumably that's Antibody Tests.
42-43 Tory MPs have signed against, Labour will oppose- wonder if it could actually fall down in the Commons if it's Vaccine or bust?
@cidered abroad Can't speak for anyone else but a number of those- excellent- vaccines that you list, prevent onward transmission? This one seems not to- reduces? For sure, they're also tried and trusted- vaccines in themselves absolutely positive, but this one- Speed vs layers of safety checks etc.
I think that if you're going to do anything like this then it needs to be done with clarity, transparency and clear data-driven rationale. Otherwise it will cause misunderstanding, confusion and will never get public consensus.
And I agree with you (and @Baba Yaga) about the complete lack of any of those things from our government. Its just been yet another example of policy being made up as they go along, knee jerk response, constant u-turns, with no clear strategy.
There are probably three reasons for having vaccine passports (and I'm not arguing for or against here, just setting out what the case might be):
- short term as an alternative to tighter restrictions: we can open this up but there's a risk so the only way we can do it safely is to use passports
- short term as amends of incentivising vaccinations: this is a public health imperative and if you go along with it you make the country safer and you get something out of it as a direct result
- long term as a means of controlling an infectious disease: where the data supports the very clear benefits, ie with them the virus stops spreading, without them it doesn't.
Seems to me that it's far too early for the last of those, not least because the data isn't even available, let alone clear.
I give you two scenarios, both starting where we were a month or two ago:
1. We hope that we will be able to relax restrictions in July. We're confident we'll be able to do so as long as cases don't rise. As cases start to rise the message becomes more cautious: the data is highlighting the risks of opening up too quickly, we need to go forward cautiously and we're looking at whether its sensible to relax restrictions and at other measures that might be necessary, including vaccine passports. As numbers continue to rise: we are still confident vaccines are helping keep this under control but given the rise in cases, hospitalisations etc we don't want to relax everything as completely as we'd intended. However, we can still take that a significant step with the reassurance that other measures, including vaccine passports in the short term, will give us.
2. Freedom Day will happen in July and it will be irreversible. We're aware the numbers are continuing to rise but vaccines vaccines vaccines. We have no plans for vaccine passports. And when the day arrives, with continuing rises in cases, along with the challenge that scientists are warning this is at best risky and irresponsible, I need to manage this news conference - so I'll suggest that we're going to introduce vaccine passports, even though we haven't really thought it through and we'll need to backtrack and obfuscate in a few hours time.
No surprise when the UK, using the second approach, finds people confused and angry.
-
1
-
6 minutes ago, Riaz said:
I’ll try and make this my last comment.
I hope I’m wrong about the vaccine and it does what it says on the tin. And everything turns out to be honky dory.
But if i am right, and birth rates are affect and/or lots of people die or suffer injuries, i hope, those of you who got personal, are big enough to admit you were wrong.
By all accounts we won't be here to do so....sorry!
Riaz - I always had you down as a bit of a Corbyn-ista. Seems like I was right and wrong - I just had the wrong one in mind!
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Riaz said:
Not being capable of driving
Your comparing that to deciding against a medical treatment….
I’m talking about the choices we make. And the consequences they have.
-
3 minutes ago, Riaz said:
that’s when you commit a crime.
Commit a crime, or breach a regulation. Yes, of course, that’s how governments work, that’s how society implements its constraints. Whether it’s in China or here - the laws might be different but the principle is the same.
-
13 minutes ago, Riaz said:
If your in China.
Freedom based on injecting chemicals. This is what it has come to now?
You evidently have more knowledge of China than I do. But it’s also the way society works here.
Sometimes by mandate; you’re not free to drive on the right. Sometimes by prohibition if you choose not to comply: driving with poor eyesight, even if, for example, you could have had it corrected by treatment but chose not to because it involved injecting chemicals.
I didn’t want to have my European citizenship taken away from me, or be deprived of my right to travel in Europe, but it’s happened because society mandated it by the election of Bozo.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Riaz said:
In China, you are punished if you don’t comply with what the government wants.
Difference?
In the UK you are punished if you don’t comply with what the government wants.
-
1 minute ago, Riaz said:
What is exactly wrong with what i shared?
It was again from government sources
Well, several people have already had a go, but in the hope you’ll take notice of at least one.
Thats based on the yellow card reporting scheme. Anyone can go through that scheme and report anything that they think happens to them after they’ve had the vaccine. Some people evidently take that very literally and report things that are blatantly unconnected. Others report things that almost certainly have no causal link. And other report minor inconveniences like the sore arm that probably 99% of all those getting the vaccine experience.
A tiny proportion record what may or may not be more serious consequences.
Now, for the third time of asking, are you seriously suggesting that pregnancy, redundancy and insect bites are among the consequences of vaccination?
And, subsidiary question, is a sore arm really a reason for not getting a vaccination?
-
1 hour ago, Riaz said:
Did you just say that
About a million people injured according to government figures is the reality
And apparently only 1-10% of issues get reported
Oh please…….
I respect your right to your view on taking vaccines.
But you are just peddling dangerous and untrue nonsense with this.
I’m still waiting for you to explain the pregnancy, redundancy and insect bite consequences to having the vaccination.
-
1 hour ago, Riaz said:
In a few years, when birth rates are down, lots of people have suffered from side affects…
I will be proven right.
If not, paranoid.
In the meantime, i shouldn’t be forced to take something or lose my freedoms.
That’s the way society works.
-
29 minutes ago, Riaz said:
I’ve not shared any disinformation and I’ve mainly shared things from the governments websites
Actually, you’ve shared 20 things from Geert Vanden Bossche and two things from government websites.
Of the latter, one you have entirely misunderstood or, more likely, deliberately misused.
The second makes precisely the point you seem to be arguing against, namely that until you get sufficient numbers of people vaccinated (regardless of vulnerability) the there’s a high risk of mutation.Dr Bossche, incidentally, trained in veterinary medicine and you can read about him here
-
13 minutes ago, Riaz said:
When did i say they don’t matter?
I wasn’t against the vaccine until they went to the lengths of trying to make us all have it.
Give it to those at risk and anyone else’s who wants it.
Trying to make everyone have it, is dis-proportionate
But there is a reason for trying to make everyone have it and that is - as has been touched on - unless you get sufficient people vaccinated to stop exponential transmission (ie keep the R0 below 1) then it will keep spreading and the risk of further lockdowns etc goes with that.
The best chance of getting back to 'normal', and of ending the need for restrictions is directly related to the number of people getting the vaccine.
-
15 minutes ago, Riaz said:
I can’t find the figures for Covid deaths for healthy people under 60, but last time i checked it was under 1000.
Deaths from vaccine 1470 and counting.
Covid has been here’s for 16 months and most people have only just been vaccinated
So
a) you're evidently of the Johnson "anyone over 80 doesn't really matter" view, only taking it that much further
b) haven't fully read the small item you've circled: "The deaths aren't necessarily caused by the vaccine though"
I really don't know why this has to keep being pointed out, but if you base your view on what's recorded on the yellow card scheme, then you'll believe that the vaccine can get you pregnant, give you insect bites, make you redundant and a whole manner of other things.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, nebristolred said:
So there's what, 40,000,000 people who have been vaccinated in the UK to some extent. And 1,470 have died within 28 days?
That sounds like about the normal number you'd expect to die from 40,000,000 in the 7 months or so we've been vaccinating people. Nothing dodgy about that at all.
Indeed....you might even conclude that the vaccine will keep you alive longer!!
-
1
-
Carabao Cup Matchday No. 1 - Forest Green Rovers v. Bristol City
in The Havanatopia Match Day Archive
Posted
Some things are just destined to come back and haunt you!