Corona impact on NRL...?

[hobbo1]

What a great few weeks in iso that was...

Who we playing round 3 ?

 

[Hangonaminute]

At this time last year (or the year before or the year before that or any year)
would players be getting stood down for not getting a flu jab?

So why are they now?

Because it was part of the deal with the Government(s) on the restart of the NRL that all players and staff be vaccinated. This was one of the conditions of allowing the restart of the NRL. Had it not been included none of the State Governments would have agreed to the proposal.

And forcing people to get flu shots become ok when?

The players have a choice, there are consequences to that choice. They can decide. No one is holding them down and forcing a needle into them.

They're being forced to choose between two options that they don't want.
Not really a fair to call it a choice.

If you're forced to choose between getting a bullet in the head or hand over your wife and kids, would you say that's a fair choice?

Because it's the same thing (maybe a little more at stake) but that's not my point, you're still being forced to choose between two options that you don't want

Not the same at all. That’s life. You get to choose if you like to or not. If you don’t like the options your employer gives you you go and find another job. Another career even. It’s still your choice. It happens all the time.

It's exactly the same, their being forced to do something against their will and their pay is being held at ransom until they do.

That's pretty much putting someone's livelihood at risk if you ask me.
It's totally wrong!!!

They are not being forced to do anything against their will. They are given a choice. It’s a feee society and they can either choose to accept it or do something else. It’s not totally wrong at all, in fact it’s totally right.

I disagree

And you are wrong.

You don't get to just claim that someone is wrong, you have to demonstrate it

Says the fool that does just that constantly in the Bitcoin thread, I don't know how many times you have told people they are wrong and refused to give a reason.

In saying that, I demonstrated you were wrong in my previous post. The players have a choice.

You don't get it do you?
It's not about whether they have a choice it's about the options they're being forced to choose between.

Do you have another option that won't endanger the lives of all other people involved including thier own families
Can you imagine what life would be like for humans if there was no such thing as medicine which is available and which is specifically designed to save people's lives
Ever had a filling without a needle
Stitches without a needle perhaps
Pain killers for broken bones
Valium for depression
Antihistamine for itching
Etc etc etc
There are many drugs being used every day by people
Including those players who don't want the needle
Its a cop out by these players
They have no problem with a pain killing injections if they get injured

Cartwright hasn't played good football for years so it's no skin off his nose not to play
He plays like he is disinterested anyway
He will still want and expect his pay cheque though
Like someone said earlier
It was no issue for him to pay a female to go have an abortion and end the life of an unborn child
But what a gutless and self centered man he is to refuse a flu jab that could potentially save lives including his own and also effect the lively hoods of every other person who is employed by the NRL.
Not only that but what about the millions of people like you and me that would love to see the NRL back up and running, with caution of course.
So
If he doesn't want the flu shot
Then he shouldn't play
Same as any other player

So every year previously every NRL player has been "endangering lives" by not getting the flu jab, is this what you're saying?

And considering the jab is only around 46% effective, are half the players that do get it also endangering lives?

That's right, there is nothing different about this year is there?

Wasn't talking to you, so butt out ya pest

I don't care if you were talking to me, this is a public forum and I'll respond to any misinformation as I wish. Very funny that you are calling me a pest though.

Pest

lol. I have gotten to you I see. Anyway, our argument is off topic.

Pest

 

[Hangonaminute]

At this time last year (or the year before or the year before that or any year)
would players be getting stood down for not getting a flu jab?

So why are they now?

Because it was part of the deal with the Government(s) on the restart of the NRL that all players and staff be vaccinated. This was one of the conditions of allowing the restart of the NRL. Had it not been included none of the State Governments would have agreed to the proposal.

And forcing people to get flu shots become ok when?

The players have a choice, there are consequences to that choice. They can decide. No one is holding them down and forcing a needle into them.

They're being forced to choose between two options that they don't want.
Not really a fair to call it a choice.

If you're forced to choose between getting a bullet in the head or hand over your wife and kids, would you say that's a fair choice?

Because it's the same thing (maybe a little more at stake) but that's not my point, you're still being forced to choose between two options that you don't want

Not the same at all. That’s life. You get to choose if you like to or not. If you don’t like the options your employer gives you you go and find another job. Another career even. It’s still your choice. It happens all the time.

It's exactly the same, their being forced to do something against their will and their pay is being held at ransom until they do.

That's pretty much putting someone's livelihood at risk if you ask me.
It's totally wrong!!!

They are not being forced to do anything against their will. They are given a choice. It’s a feee society and they can either choose to accept it or do something else. It’s not totally wrong at all, in fact it’s totally right.

I disagree

And you are wrong.

You don't get to just claim that someone is wrong, you have to demonstrate it

Says the fool that does just that constantly in the Bitcoin thread, I don't know how many times you have told people they are wrong and refused to give a reason.

In saying that, I demonstrated you were wrong in my previous post. The players have a choice.

You don't get it do you?
It's not about whether they have a choice it's about the options they're being forced to choose between.

Do you have another option that won't endanger the lives of all other people involved including thier own families
Can you imagine what life would be like for humans if there was no such thing as medicine which is available and which is specifically designed to save people's lives
Ever had a filling without a needle
Stitches without a needle perhaps
Pain killers for broken bones
Valium for depression
Antihistamine for itching
Etc etc etc
There are many drugs being used every day by people
Including those players who don't want the needle
Its a cop out by these players
They have no problem with a pain killing injections if they get injured

Cartwright hasn't played good football for years so it's no skin off his nose not to play
He plays like he is disinterested anyway
He will still want and expect his pay cheque though
Like someone said earlier
It was no issue for him to pay a female to go have an abortion and end the life of an unborn child
But what a gutless and self centered man he is to refuse a flu jab that could potentially save lives including his own and also effect the lively hoods of every other person who is employed by the NRL.
Not only that but what about the millions of people like you and me that would love to see the NRL back up and running, with caution of course.
So
If he doesn't want the flu shot
Then he shouldn't play
Same as any other player

So every year previously every NRL player has been "endangering lives" by not getting the flu jab, is this what you're saying?

And considering the jab is only around 46% effective, are half the players that do get it also endangering lives?

Let me ask you
Have you been immunized for the German Measles ?
If so why
Ever had needles inject you with some kind of medical treatment
Any tattoos
There are reasons for taking the flu shot this year more so then others
If you went to school you could work that out if you listened

One last question for you
Are you totally organic in what you eat and drink
Just about everything you eat or drink these days has chemicals but you would still consume these

You seem to be confusing me for an antivaxxer.

 

[Geo]

What a great few weeks in iso that was...

Who we playing round 3 ?

Parramatta at the neutral BankWest stadium

 

[JD Tiger]

What a great few weeks in iso that was...

Who we playing round 3 ?

Not announced yet. Early rumours were Eels, but the draw isn't done, so who knows.

 

[Fade.To.Black]

Anyone else getting an ad for earwax? 🤮

You may call it earwax, Kevin Rudd calls it chewing gum🤙
https://youtu.be/_ipvdBnU8F8

 

[Fade.To.Black]

What a great few weeks in iso that was...

Who we playing round 3 ?

Parramatta at the neutral BankWest stadium

I think the correct term is 'gender neutral' these days

 

[Tiger5150]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue

You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

 

[cochise]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.

 

[Tiger5150]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.

Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

 

[cochise]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.

 

[Tiger5150]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.

Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

 

[Guest]

At this time last year (or the year before or the year before that or any year)
would players be getting stood down for not getting a flu jab?

So why are they now?

Because it was part of the deal with the Government(s) on the restart of the NRL that all players and staff be vaccinated. This was one of the conditions of allowing the restart of the NRL. Had it not been included none of the State Governments would have agreed to the proposal.

And forcing people to get flu shots become ok when?

The players have a choice, there are consequences to that choice. They can decide. No one is holding them down and forcing a needle into them.

They're being forced to choose between two options that they don't want.
Not really a fair to call it a choice.

If you're forced to choose between getting a bullet in the head or hand over your wife and kids, would you say that's a fair choice?

Because it's the same thing (maybe a little more at stake) but that's not my point, you're still being forced to choose between two options that you don't want

Not the same at all. That’s life. You get to choose if you like to or not. If you don’t like the options your employer gives you you go and find another job. Another career even. It’s still your choice. It happens all the time.

It's exactly the same, their being forced to do something against their will and their pay is being held at ransom until they do.

That's pretty much putting someone's livelihood at risk if you ask me.
It's totally wrong!!!

They are not being forced to do anything against their will. They are given a choice. It’s a feee society and they can either choose to accept it or do something else. It’s not totally wrong at all, in fact it’s totally right.

I disagree

And you are wrong.

You don't get to just claim that someone is wrong, you have to demonstrate it

Says the fool that does just that constantly in the Bitcoin thread, I don't know how many times you have told people they are wrong and refused to give a reason.

In saying that, I demonstrated you were wrong in my previous post. The players have a choice.

You don't get it do you?
It's not about whether they have a choice it's about the options they're being forced to choose between.

Do you have another option that won't endanger the lives of all other people involved including thier own families
Can you imagine what life would be like for humans if there was no such thing as medicine which is available and which is specifically designed to save people's lives
Ever had a filling without a needle
Stitches without a needle perhaps
Pain killers for broken bones
Valium for depression
Antihistamine for itching
Etc etc etc
There are many drugs being used every day by people
Including those players who don't want the needle
Its a cop out by these players
They have no problem with a pain killing injections if they get injured

Cartwright hasn't played good football for years so it's no skin off his nose not to play
He plays like he is disinterested anyway
He will still want and expect his pay cheque though
Like someone said earlier
It was no issue for him to pay a female to go have an abortion and end the life of an unborn child
But what a gutless and self centered man he is to refuse a flu jab that could potentially save lives including his own and also effect the lively hoods of every other person who is employed by the NRL.
Not only that but what about the millions of people like you and me that would love to see the NRL back up and running, with caution of course.
So
If he doesn't want the flu shot
Then he shouldn't play
Same as any other player

So every year previously every NRL player has been "endangering lives" by not getting the flu jab, is this what you're saying?

And considering the jab is only around 46% effective, are half the players that do get it also endangering lives?

That's right, there is nothing different about this year is there?

Wasn't talking to you, so butt out ya pest

I don't care if you were talking to me, this is a public forum and I'll respond to any misinformation as I wish. Very funny that you are calling me a pest though.

Pest

lol. I have gotten to you I see. Anyway, our argument is off topic.

Pest

Keep that up and you can have a spell from the forum. Your choice.

 

[cochise]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

To avoid legal action, I would say that the 2 parties are in disagreement over whether a pandemic activates a Force Majeure. To test this in court would be expensive and time consuming for the NRL and for ch 9 so maybe cheaper and in everyone's best interest to renegotiate. That doesn't mean that the current contract is not valid or that the NRL couldn't or won't force ch 9 to meet their obligations.

 

[Tiger5150]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

To avoid legal action, I would say that the 2 parties are in disagreement over whether a pandemic activates a Force Majeure. To test this in court would be expensive and time consuming for the NRL and for ch 9 so maybe cheaper and in everyone's best interest to renegotiate. That doesn't mean that the current contract is not valid or that the NRL couldn't or won't force ch 9 to meet their obligations.

I disagree with you on this point. The Contract is clearly frustrated (and therefore may be Force Majeure) however can not be suspended. Nine are not getting the number of games under the original Contract. Contract is frustrated. This is clearly why it is being re-negotiated.

Calling it Force Majeure is really irrelevant. The Contract is frustrated. End of story. Unless it is specifically listed as a "Force Majeure" event (which it wouldnt be), FM is irrelevant. Contract is frustrated. All FM means is that the non performing party isnt held for further liabilities, which is argued for frustration regardless of FM.

 

[cochise]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

To avoid legal action, I would say that the 2 parties are in disagreement over whether a pandemic activates a Force Majeure. To test this in court would be expensive and time consuming for the NRL and for ch 9 so maybe cheaper and in everyone's best interest to renegotiate. That doesn't mean that the current contract is not valid or that the NRL couldn't or won't force ch 9 to meet their obligations.

I disagree with you on this point. The Contract is clearly frustrated (and therefore may be Force Majeure) however can not be suspended. Nine are not getting the number of games under the original Contract. Contract is frustrated. This is clearly why it is being re-negotiated.

Calling it Force Majeure is really irrelevant. The Contract is frustrated. End of story. Unless it is specifically listed as a "Force Majeure" event (which it wouldnt be), FM is irrelevant. Contract is frustrated. All FM means is that the non performing party isnt held for further liabilities, which is argued for frustration regardless of FM.

Under a FM the NRL doesn't have to provide the amount of games in the contract, it is very likely that an act of god clause would be included in a FM. What would need to be determined is whether a pandemic is an act of god, which arguments can be made each way. The human involvement in the starting of this pandemic would be an issue when arguing that it is an act of god.

What we are discussing though is incredibly pointless as neither of us has seen the contract and no argument can be really made by either of us without exactly what the contract says in this area.

 

[Tiger5150]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

To avoid legal action, I would say that the 2 parties are in disagreement over whether a pandemic activates a Force Majeure. To test this in court would be expensive and time consuming for the NRL and for ch 9 so maybe cheaper and in everyone's best interest to renegotiate. That doesn't mean that the current contract is not valid or that the NRL couldn't or won't force ch 9 to meet their obligations.

I disagree with you on this point. The Contract is clearly frustrated (and therefore may be Force Majeure) however can not be suspended. Nine are not getting the number of games under the original Contract. Contract is frustrated. This is clearly why it is being re-negotiated.

Calling it Force Majeure is really irrelevant. The Contract is frustrated. End of story. Unless it is specifically listed as a "Force Majeure" event (which it wouldnt be), FM is irrelevant. Contract is frustrated. All FM means is that the non performing party isnt held for further liabilities, which is argued for frustration regardless of FM.

Under a FM the NRL doesn't have to provide the amount of games in the contract, it is very likely that an act of god clause would be included in a FM. What would need to be determined is whether a pandemic is an act of god, which arguments can be made each way. The human involvement in the starting of this pandemic would be an issue when arguing that it is an act of god.

What we are discussing though is incredibly pointless as neither of us has seen the contract and no argument can be really made by either of us without exactly what the contract says in this area.

Thats not how FM works. Under FM, NRL doesnt have to provide the games, but Nine dont have to pay them. THe NRL are the non performing party. THe Contract is frustrated and over. All FM means is Nine cant nail NRL's balls to the wall in court and the NRL isnt liable for Nines losses as a result. This is also true under simple frustration. FM is really just a fancy way of labelling specific causes of frustration of contract so that they arent argued. Its irrelevant if this is listed or construed as an Act of God. It doesnt matter. NRL can not perform the Contract. Its over.

THat is why they are re-negotiating.

 

[tiger05premier]

If the NRL allow players to play without the flu vaccine, from a health point of view it probably doesn't matter that much.

But that isn't really the issue, the same players would presumably refuse any Covid-19 vaccine should it become available in the future.

If you allow it with one vaccine you can't very well change the rules for another. I assume that is why the QLD Health Dept are holding firm.

NSW Health and the NRL should do exactly the same as QLD.
\
The players have the right to refuse any vaccine, but they should not assume that refusal has no consequences.

One of the best posts ever

 

[cochise]

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

They should’ve let channel 9 walk instead of giving them the reduced deal they wanted. Hopefully a draw can be made soon there’s only two weeks until the footy, it’s already long overdue


You do realise the Contract has been broken dont you? Of course they get a reduced deal, where has been the games that the NRL have been providing for the last two months?

That is not necessarily the case as there is likely a Force Majeure.


Same result. Contract is ended. Either broken or frustrated. Same result.

No its not, most Force Majeure's allow for a suspension of the contract during the crisis. The contract can be then resumed after the crisis has passed.


Its clearly not the case in this contract. Why are we negotiating?

To avoid legal action, I would say that the 2 parties are in disagreement over whether a pandemic activates a Force Majeure. To test this in court would be expensive and time consuming for the NRL and for ch 9 so maybe cheaper and in everyone's best interest to renegotiate. That doesn't mean that the current contract is not valid or that the NRL couldn't or won't force ch 9 to meet their obligations.

I disagree with you on this point. The Contract is clearly frustrated (and therefore may be Force Majeure) however can not be suspended. Nine are not getting the number of games under the original Contract. Contract is frustrated. This is clearly why it is being re-negotiated.

Calling it Force Majeure is really irrelevant. The Contract is frustrated. End of story. Unless it is specifically listed as a "Force Majeure" event (which it wouldnt be), FM is irrelevant. Contract is frustrated. All FM means is that the non performing party isnt held for further liabilities, which is argued for frustration regardless of FM.

Under a FM the NRL doesn't have to provide the amount of games in the contract, it is very likely that an act of god clause would be included in a FM. What would need to be determined is whether a pandemic is an act of god, which arguments can be made each way. The human involvement in the starting of this pandemic would be an issue when arguing that it is an act of god.

What we are discussing though is incredibly pointless as neither of us has seen the contract and no argument can be really made by either of us without exactly what the contract says in this area.


Thats not how FM works. Under FM, NRL doesnt have to provide the games, but Nine dont have to pay them. THe NRL are the non performing party. THe Contract is frustrated and over. All FM means is Nine cant nail NRL's balls to the wall in court and the NRL isnt liable for Nines losses as a result. This is also true under simple frustration. FM is really just a fancy way of labelling specific causes of frustration of contract so that they arent argued. Its irrelevant if this is listed or construed as an Act of God. It doesnt matter. NRL can not perform the Contract. Its over.

THat is why they are re-negotiating.

Not true, Channel 9 doesn't have to pay for the games they missed, that does not automatically mean they don't have to pay the remainder of the contract if the NRL is able to fulfil their obligations.

Anyway we obviously disagree over this and I don't see either of us changing our minds, so I will just leave it here.

 

[Harvey]

I hope the balcony and roof fans at Leichhardt are practising Nathan's Tik Toc dance should we meet there this year-safely of course. Perhaps the video operator at the ground could project the steps on to the screen.

Just don't project any of Tyrone May's social media videos, the video operator may find themselves arrested.