Germany’s return is going well....

[T 190]

Somewhat aggressive and abusive from someone who is clearly talking about something without ever actually ever having read what has been said. What would you call someone who opines on something they have never actually read and are abusive to someone who has actually read what is happening. Clearly you have no argument of substance so you can only be aggressive and abusive. Please feel free to get back to me when you have actually read what has been actually said otherwise it doesn’t look good when you are being abusive about something you have never actually read. 

[Crabbycanary3 994]

25 minutes ago, T said:

Somewhat aggressive and abusive from someone who is clearly talking about something without ever actually ever having read what has been said. What would you call someone who opines on something they have never actually read and are abusive to someone who has actually read what is happening. Clearly you have no argument of substance so you can only be aggressive and abusive. Please feel free to get back to me when you have actually read what has been actually said otherwise it doesn’t look good when you are being abusive about something you have never actually read. 

One not thing.

Missed it again. Or did you choose to ignore it............?

Edited May 9, 2020 by Crabbycanary3

[T 190]

1 hour ago, JF said:

Quarantining teams wasn’t part of the plan. Quarantining players that tested positive was. The whole team being quarantined is a local authority decision so isn’t a decision across the board. If every team in every league has to quarantine for 14 days when they record positive tests then no league has any chance of completing 

Yes sure you don’t want it to happen but the football plan is a subset of the government plan and was always subject to German government approval. and the German overall plan.   It was always reported as I’ve said as  a plan that potentially might work with no guarantees. Plausible and conceivable are the words used. The plan has always been to gradually lift restrictions and then reimpose them locally if there are any outbreaks so a targeted rather broad brush approach. The alternative though is just to give up. But of course people would know all of this if they had actually read the German news which I suspect they haven’t given the generally abysmal UK foreign language skills. So people are arguing their point without ever actually having read what has been said but please feel free to point out to me the original news reports if you have read any additional original reports that add additional info I’ve not seen otherwise you are talking from a position from what might have been said rather than actually was said. 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

9 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

BB, I agree that a repeat study is needed but also what I haven't seen from that study as reported is how much extra permanent damage, if any, to the lungs this deep-seated infection that players risk will cause. It may be it just makes it harder to eradicate the virus but with no more damage than that to an ordinary person who has a less deep-seated infection.

But if the implication/likelihood/probability is that this will cause greater permanent damage, such as to end a player's career, not to mention causing heath problems later in life, then it is hard to see how football can restart until a vaccine is developed. Players who could afford not to take the risk would not take it, and even some of those who couldn't afford it wouldn't.

And tonight this comment:

Not everyone is satisfied with the Bundesliga returning so soon since the pandemic caused a halt to the sporting world. The World Players' Association, the umbrella organisation for more than 100 unions including the footballers' global body FIFPro, fears decisions to restart are being taken without ample scientific evidence.

Chief executive Brendan Schwab said: 'Extensive measures are being developed aimed at preventing COVID-19 from entering or spreading throughout the sports environment.

'These measures, however, do not fully address the potential impact of the disease on individuals who contract it and how symptoms can be treated. Recent research suggests that athletes may be particularly vulnerable, especially to lung and organ damage, which may be very serious and even career-ending.' 

If i had wanted an authoritative and relevant  quote to highlight the point  have been making on this thread I really could not have asked for anything better than that. It does not matter how supposedly controlled and confined the sporting environment is and/or how much testing is done.

What matters, if the research is to be believed, is that if the virus despite everything gets through, and so far with football camps the evidence is that it will, then players are actually more vulnerable than  ordinary people to permanent lung damage. QED.

[T 190]

I fully get that people are being aggressive and anzaubern to Germans because they are.xenophobic and have no substantive response so are rude or say it has passed over you because no argument of substance. The German plan has always been to gradually try to release restrictions but reimpose restrictions if there are any outbreaks. That has always been the plan. I’m just pointing out the facts and getting racist abuse in return because people don’t like foreigners and don’t like facts that conflict with their preconceived ideas. 

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Missed it again,

It's NOT the Germans.

[T 190]

Purple. How long did you spend looking for that 🙂  What do we do if it is endemic? Never play again? I’ve always understood you are more sensitive when working out hard so still not doubting the risk you pointed out and still don’t now you have repeated exactly the same point again. It is a risk but I think as you are acknowledging if the players are in quarantine and there are no positive tests for 2 weeks then the risk should be low. And what you are pointing out is also a risk but not a certainty. You are still better off being a young athlete rather than old and obese. The overall risk is still very low for young fit athletic people   The average age of people dying is still over 80 in Germany. 
 

I might potentially be higher risk but the advice is for me to go out and exercise. At some point you do have to take some risk and if you can mitagate  that risk suffeciently year then it is reasonable to go ahead but there are never any guarantees in life. It is always a risk assessment and we will always ultimately lose that bet. And it does depend on your attitude to risk which is a personal view and I’m not into into taking extreme risk but like some risk otherwise I would have stayed in Norfolk my whole life and never done anything  
 

I’m not saying there isn’t a risk. I’m saying there is a risk but the RKI has assessed that overall risk which no doubt takes in the risk of a more severe case and assessed that overall risk as acceptable and the Germans are taking a conservative approach to this. I see nothing in what you have said which contradicts the RKI overall risk assessment. They have decided you can go for a drive in the car but it does have an element of increased risk as you rightly point out so has to be a Volvo with all the safety gismos. 

Edited May 9, 2020 by T

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

1 hour ago, JF said:

As in deliberately had their players infected with the Virus??? That’s a seriously strong and probably liable accusation!

Think they're suggestion was that they were faking it but with the current journalists it wouldn't surprise me if they suggested that.

[T 190]

Oh I do get it is personal abuse but I have taken plenty of anti German abuse and I don’t get why people are attacking what Germany is doing when the RKI has said it is an acceptable risk and the RKI has done so much better than the UK unless there is an anti German bias because they have been very conservative in their overall approach compared to the UK.   People seem to attack it with no expertise where as those that have analysed it say it is reasonable. Please explain to me why someone from the UK knows better than someone from Germany what is happening in Germany and why the UK view is better than the German view because I see no evidence to support that whatsoever.

 

Push the xenophobic button and watch the xenophobes get abusive.  

Edited May 9, 2020 by T

[Crabbycanary3 994]

4 minutes ago, T said:

Oh I do get it is personal abuse but I have taken plenty of anti German abuse and I don’t get why people are attacking what Germany is doing when the RKI has said it is an acceptable risk and the RKI has done so much better than the UK unless there is an anti German bias because they have been very conservative in their overall approach compared to the UK.   People seem to attack it with no expertise where as those that have analysed it say it is reasonable. Please explain to me why someone from the UK knows better than someone from Germany what is happening in Germany and why the UK view is better than the German view because I see no evidence to support that whatsoever.

 

Push the xenophobic button and watch the xenophobes get abusive.  

Abuse? There are none so blind as those who will not see.

 People are just wise to you. I was, a few years ago. Others have joined the party.

[Van wink 2,994]

50 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

And tonight this comment:

Not everyone is satisfied with the Bundesliga returning so soon since the pandemic caused a halt to the sporting world. The World Players' Association, the umbrella organisation for more than 100 unions including the footballers' global body FIFPro, fears decisions to restart are being taken without ample scientific evidence.

Chief executive Brendan Schwab said: 'Extensive measures are being developed aimed at preventing COVID-19 from entering or spreading throughout the sports environment.

'These measures, however, do not fully address the potential impact of the disease on individuals who contract it and how symptoms can be treated. Recent research suggests that athletes may be particularly vulnerable, especially to lung and organ damage, which may be very serious and even career-ending.' 

If i had wanted an authoritative and relevant  quote to highlight the point  have been making on this thread I really could not have asked for anything better than that. It does not matter how supposedly controlled and confined the sporting environment is and/or how much testing is done.

What matters, if the research is to be believed, is that if the virus despite everything gets through, and so far with football camps the evidence is that it will, then players are actually more vulnerable than  ordinary people to permanent lung damage. QED.

The clinical aspects of this undoubtedly need more research before giving the go ahead for professional sport. 

[CANARYKING 634]

How did you manage a post when all I get is “ service unavailable “

[T 190]

So still just personal abuse but if you have any argument of genuine substance rather than just personal attacks because you don’t like the substance or style then I would be genuinely interested but is seems you don’t have anything of substantial to say  unless you are trying to suggest you are smugly superior. and it is absolutely fine to give unsubstantiated and incorrect views. 

[T 190]

2 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

How did you manage a post when all I get is “ service unavailable “

Consider yourself lucky. All I’m getting is brain unavailable 🙂

[T 190]

6 minutes ago, Van wink said:

The clinical aspects of this undoubtedly need more research before giving the go ahead for professional sport. 

VW but at what point would we resume?  We know there is a potential risk and there always will be however muxh research we do. We know there is a risk with all of us including going to the supermarket, going to work and the shops and other countries are doing it. It is always going to be a estimated risk assessment and there is always going to be a risk. We could cancel everything until there is a vaccine but that is just not viable. I still prefer their odds to your or mine in a very controllled environment and I assume you as well as I are getting on with life while complying with the guidelines or should we just lay down and die now ?  Why is your risk assessment better than theirs and why are you applying it to football more than other aspects  of society

[Crabbycanary3 994]

7 minutes ago, T said:

So still just personal abuse but if you have any argument of genuine substance rather than just personal attacks because you don’t like the substance or style then I would be genuinely interested but is seems you don’t have anything of substantial to say  unless you are trying to suggest you are smugly superior. and it is absolutely fine to give unsubstantiated and incorrect views. 

It's not abuse. It's calling you out for what you are. 

Smugly superior? The irony meter has just broken.

 

[Van wink 2,994]

1 minute ago, T said:

VW but at what point would we resume?  We know there is a potential risk and there always will be however muxh research we do. We know there is a risk with all of us including going to the supermarket, going to work and the shops and other countries are doing it. It is always going to be a estimated risk assessment and there is always going to be a risk. We could cancel everything until there is a vaccine but that is just not viable. I still prefer their odds to your or mine in a very controllled environment and I assume you as well as I are getting on with life while complying with the guidelines or should we just lay down and die now ?  Why is your risk assessment better than theirs and why are you applying it to football more than other aspects  of society

You don’t understand risk assessment, you keep referring to risk but overlook the potential for harm which is a key ingredient of any risk assessment. What has been highlighted in the paper Purple referred to is the increased potential for harm in athletes. That needs to be further researched and understood before moving on.

[T 190]

1 minute ago, Crabbycanary3 said:

It's not abuse. It's calling you out for what you are. 

Smugly superior? The irony meter has just broken.

 

So just personal attacks then. I get that you don’t like me of course but so you think I am bothered because you have absolutely nothing of any substance to say. Of course I’m going to know more about something if I actually read what has been said and can understand the language. So of course I have superior knowledge of this subject. That is a fact unless you arguing that if you haven’t read about a subject you will have more knowledge. Just as I fully acknowledge you are superior at making personal attacks without having anything of substance to say. I don’t think you quite get how social media works. If you don’t like substance and alternative views then I suggest you use the ignore button because you clearly have nothing of any substance to say but if you have something of substance to say I would be genuinely interested. Why don’t you say why my arguments are wrong. You might get something more out of the experience.  I’m always interested to learn more from other people. It’s called debate. 

[T 190]

29 minutes ago, Van wink said:

You don’t understand risk assessment, you keep referring to risk but overlook the potential for harm which is a key ingredient of any risk assessment. What has been highlighted in the paper Purple referred to is the increased potential for harm in athletes. That needs to be further researched and understood before moving on.

Of course I understand risk. I studied risk at university and it is what I do for my day job. And of course the players who have been affected. Are being studied closely.   We know there is a risk. That isn’t going away potentially ever and we will never know what the risk is if we don’t experiment. If they don’t play football they are not footballers and we will never know. We don’t know what will happen with the lifting of restrictions so that is why we are lifting them gradually. We don’t know which treatments will work. That is why we are testing them. We don’t what vaccines will work. That is why we are testing them. If we take your approach we would never do anything because we don’t know what will happen if we do nothing so we are doing something very cautiously.
 

Of course I recognise there is a risk but we have to do something at some point. 
 

risk is a multiple so if your risk of dying from CV19 is 100 but your risk of catching it is 0 the overall risk assessment is zero. An extreme example but that is how risk assessment works. Purole is talking about the first factor but I’m talking about the overall factor so the first one is higher but the second one is lower then you end up with an overall acceptance figure. That is essentially what is happening here. The first factor is potentially higher as purple  says so you put in actions to reduce your second risk factor to hopefully come up with an overall acceptable risk. There is still a risk but there always is.
 

Of course I don’t know lots of things but I do know numbers and German which are kind of relevant for a German risk assessment. I rarely comment on football for instance because I ve no doubt others know a lot more than me but I’ve been reading the local reports on this and it is part of my job so I’m sorry but you don’t know what you are talking about line if you don’t agree with my views is somewhat tedious. 

Edited May 9, 2020 by T

[Van wink 2,994]

11 minutes ago, T said:

Of course I understand risk. I studied risk at university and it is what I do for my day job. And of course the players who have been affected. Are being studied closely.   We know there is a risk. That isn’t going away potentially ever and we will never know what the risk is if we don’t experiment. If they don’t play football they are not footballers and we will never know. We don’t know what will happen with the lifting of restrictions so that is why we are lifting them gradually. We don’t know which treatments will work. That is why we are testing them. We don’t what vaccines will work. That is why we are testing them. If we take your approach we would never do anything because we don’t know what will happen if we do nothing so we are doing something very cautiously.
 

Of course I recognise there is a risk but we have to do something at some point. 

You don’t understand risk to health if you cant grasp the concept of potential for harm.

Edited May 9, 2020 by Van wink

[Crabbycanary3 994]

1 minute ago, T said:

So just personal attacks then. I get that you don’t like me of course but so you think I am bothered because you have absolutely nothing of any substance to say. Of course I’m going to know more about something if I actually read what has been said and can understand the language. So of course I have superior knowledge of this subject. That is a fact unless you arguing that if you haven’t read about a subject you will have more knowledge. Just as I fully acknowledge you are superior at making personal attacks without having anything of substance to say. I don’t think you quite get how social media works. If you don’t like substance and alternative views then I suggest you use the ignore button because you clearly have nothing of any substance to say but if you have something of substance to say I would be genuinely interested. Why don’t you say why my arguments are wrong. You might get something more out of the experience.  I’m always interested to learn more from other people. It’s called debate. 

I haven't offered any opinion on this subject yet, so,as a consequence you can claim whatever you like in regards to substance. language skills or knowledge. Doesn't mean I haven't read it, understood German, or don't have an opinion, does it? 

The beauty of how social media works is that it allows everyone to have an opinion. I don't think you quite get that.

I commented because other posters on here had sussed, and called, you out. 

So, it's not only me who has the same opinion of you, but is that because we are all xenophobic, uneducated, single language racists?

To save you presuming anything else, for your agenda,  I have worked in 2 countries already this year, many thousands of miles apart, and worked with Indians, Iranians, French, South Africans and Kiwis (I must admit, I was grateful that they all spoke English, phew!) and even though my Dad is dead, I bet he was bigger than your Dad.

 

 

 

[T 190]

VW I get it. There is a risk. I’m making that assessment ever time I go out on my bike or do whatever. I potentially have a higher risk of getting severely ill too but I look at the stats and I look at the expert advice and take mitigating actions. 
 

i take a potentially fatal risk every time I ski off piste and have got into some dodgy situations by making mistakes but I assess the risk and take expert advice and mitigating actions to reduce my overall risk. 
 

Of course I understand risk to heath and life and I understand risk theory and I look at the risk of catching the diesease and not just the risk of dying if I do get the dirsease to assess my overall risk. You and purple are just looking at one element of the overall risk which is why I keep disagreeing because it fundamentally goes against risk theory and best risk practice.   In your style you and purple don’t understand risk and have clearly never studied it. 

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, T said:

VW I get it. There is a risk. I’m making that assessment ever time I go out on my bike or do whatever. I potentially have a higher risk of getting severely ill too but I look at the stats and I look at the expert advice and take mitigating actions. 
 

i take a potentially fatal risk every time I ski off piste and have got into some dodgy situations by making mistakes but I assess the risk and take expert advice and mitigating actions to reduce my overall risk. 
 

Of course I understand risk to heath and life and I understand risk theory and I look at the risk of catching the diesease and not just the risk of dying if I do get the dirsease to assess my overall risk. You and purple are just looking at one element of the overall risk which is why I keep disagreeing because it fundamentally goes against risk theory and best risk practice.   In your style you and purple don’t understand risk and have clearly never studied it. 

It doesn’t go against risk theory, risk theory requires you to understand the potential for harm, at the moment with this virus that’s unknown. That’s why more research is needed before you can undertake a proper assessment. I’m not discussing the point anymore, I know you like to have the last word so be my guest,.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

Comes back to the internet after a few hours away. Reads last dozen or so posts on this thread. Says ‘Oh dear god’ and  slaps hand rather harder than intended against forehead three times. Puts another extra bottle of lockdown Grenache-based white in the fridge for the joys of tomorrow.

[Van wink 2,994]

16 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Comes back to the internet after a few hours away. Reads last dozen or so posts on this thread. Says ‘Oh dear god’ and  slaps hand rather harder than intended against forehead three times. Puts another extra bottle of lockdown Grenache-based white in the fridge for the joys of tomorrow.

It’s a lot worse than that Jim

[T 190]

So for anyone actually interested in what German news is saying rather than personally attacking people for reporting what the need and risk theory actually says then they are saying that it was always anticipated and planned that the situation in Dresden could happen, the situation is being dealt with as always agreed with the German government authorities, buffer has been built into the plan to deal with situation and the plan is still to end the season.  
 

So it is all happening in accordance with the plan agreed with the government. Test, trace and isolate. Whether it all works out is of course still open but it is still going in accordance with the agreed process. I am merely reporting what the German news is saying and explaining what risk theory tells us.

[T 190]

5 hours ago, Van wink said:

It doesn’t go against risk theory, risk theory requires you to understand the potential for harm, at the moment with this virus that’s unknown. That’s why more research is needed before you can undertake a proper assessment. I’m not discussing the point anymore, I know you like to have the last word so be my guest,.

Sorry but that is factually incorrect. There is no requirement to know exactly what the risk is. You can make an assessment based on other diseases and 5 months of data. You will never know until afterward so you have to make an assessment based on the current info available. Decisions have to be made now based on current knowledge. That is all you can ever do. You will never know what the actual risk is unless you experiment. How else are you going to do the risk assessment that you propose unless you go ahead. 

[T 190]

6 hours ago, Crabbycanary3 said:

I haven't offered any opinion on this subject yet, so,as a consequence you can claim whatever you like in regards to substance. language skills or knowledge. Doesn't mean I haven't read it, understood German, or don't have an opinion, does it? 

The beauty of how social media works is that it allows everyone to have an opinion. I don't think you quite get that.

I commented because other posters on here had sussed, and called, you out. 

So, it's not only me who has the same opinion of you, but is that because we are all xenophobic, uneducated, single language racists?

To save you presuming anything else, for your agenda,  I have worked in 2 countries already this year, many thousands of miles apart, and worked with Indians, Iranians, French, South Africans and Kiwis (I must admit, I was grateful that they all spoke English, phew!) and even though my Dad is dead, I bet he was bigger than your Dad.

 

 

 

So what have you sussed?  Still no argument on substance then. And what on earth is the rant about parents about.
 

i am sorry but It is frustrating when people say things that are inconsistent with what is actually being reported in the news by the people responsible. and that are in consistent with standard theory. Why do you think that I don’t understand German or probability theory?
 

 I confess that I’ve only looked at the main German news channels so of you have anything from the other reputable news sources please feel free to share.

It is not some kind of waving match. some people just happen to know more about some subjects than others that is all and I’m merely reporting what is actually being said locally by those responsible rather than seeking to personally attack any individuals or the Government or the RKI. I’ve Seen plenty of personal abuse because you don’t like what I’m reporting but I’ve  seen nothing to suggest what I’ve reported is wrong or that. the RKI is wrong. 

[T 190]

Just announced that the general public and amateur football can start football training outside from tomorrow in Germany    Of course this will be stopped if there is an outbreak. So if they think it is safe enough for the general public then understandable they think ok for professionals in a highly controlled environment  

i do take the point that there is potentially an increased risk of a more severe deeper infection which sounds entirely reasonable and logical and consistent with what I’ve read before but I do suspect that this is no secret to the RKI and this has been taken into their account when giving their advice. Staying fit and healthy is important  

Sorry but I would rather follow the advice of the RKI rather than punters on social media. 

[yellow_belly 226]

I have no idea what T is rambling on about and cannot be bothered to read all the posts to try and fathom why people are racist it why they ‘have it in for’ T.

But in reply to the OP. Things seem to be going array in Germany re the football restart. 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.goal.com/en/amp/news/german-football-restart-dilemma-dresden-squad-quarantine/1slurqcoei1t01nnpb0fi1y6t7

With regard to the restart in the UK, it is bonkers and fuelled by money only. Little appetite by supporters and wider community. Alas, football is a non entity until things improve, so that includes the next season. 
 

Apologies to T if you find this post racist. (It isn’t but) I am confused by rules of the modern snowflake.