Joined
Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Wests Tigers Discussion read more

@hobbo1 said in Matterson free to play, Douehi to miss a week:

@rustycage said in Matterson free to play, Douehi to miss a week:

@Elderslie_Tiger said in Matterson free to play, Douehi to miss a week:

@TheDaBoss said in Matterson free to play, Douehi to miss a week:

@twentyforty said in Matterson free to play, Douehi to miss a week:

The real story here is … Adam needs to improve his tackling technique. Or simply stop the shoulder charging and shorts grabbing.

the thing is, he didnt hit him with his shoulder, it was more like his back or ribs that made first contact
but i do agree

Needs some tips from Sam Mclntyre

When it comes to Sivo you have to do the best you can for self preservation a piece of 4 x 2 most probably wouldn’t stop him😂😂😂😂😂😂

The stupid “no shoulder charge” rule doesn’t make space for the difference in size between players. Benjis argument was nonsense the other night. I don’t know how many people really ever were seriously injured from a shoulder charge. I wish it could be unwound. Thats the second time AD has tried to tackle in that fashion. It seems a really dangerous way to try to tackle. He’d be far better off going cheek to cheek as a fullback.

What the hell is cheek to cheek ?

Your shoulder to their hip, your (facial) cheek to their (butt) cheek. Old school tackle lessons

posted in Contracts read more

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@JoshColeman99 said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

@Magpieger said in Signing Suggestions & Rumours:

I wonder if Blore could make a transition to front-row, he’s very young and already a pretty big rig. Might end up like Fisher-Harris?

Maybe eventually but I’m pretty sure they want to start him on the edge. Gus Gould said his best attribute is his hole running and he looked good there in the limited minutes he played there vs eels

Really looking forward to seeing him after a full pre-season. With some conditioning and maybe trimming down a little he’s gonna be a weapon. I’m sure he’ll show Madge he’s up for bigger, quality minutes.

This is the key for Blore and will be what makes or breaks him. Probably couldnt have a better coach for this stage of his career.

posted in National Rugby League read more

@happy_tiger said in Broncos : Wooden Spoon:

@mike said in Broncos : Wooden Spoon:

@Geo said in Broncos : Wooden Spoon:

OMG…scroll

See, I said he was using the wrong head.

If i could scroll i would …the minute another post appears i cant scroll

Cant wait to get back to the keyboard

No rush

posted in General Discussion read more

@CocaCola said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

@Tiger5150 said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

@CocaCola said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

These graphs tell the story.

Covid-19 testing is severely flawed resulting in majority of false positives results. The graphs clearly indicate no direct relation between cases & deaths since day 1.

I will repeat myself, out of all the ‘Covid’ deaths to date, 94% of those deaths have been reported as having previous underlying health issues, you know the type of health issues that make up the majority of death stats on a yearly basis.

In Australia, 19 people under the age of 60 have reportedly died from Covid, only 5 of those under the age of 50. Not quite the ‘deadly’ virus some bang on about. This also doesn’t take into consideration that some of those had underlying health issues.

The media needs to stop this nonsense of reporting ‘new daily cases’ the stats say it means nothing!.

https://images2.imgbox.com/a8/f3/UcYNIQ07_o.png
https://images2.imgbox.com/7e/57/EGGWsUoE_o.png

Sources:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data

https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers#cases-and-deaths-by-age-and-sex

Mate those graphs DO tell the story, the same story as the CDC etc are reporting, trouble is you dont know how to read a graph or understand mathematics.

Those graphs show a clear correlation between cases and deaths and they are running around 1% of cases which is about right. Those graphs look a bit weird because of the scale which doesnt provide detail of the smaller data set (deaths) but it looks right…about 1-2%

CDC reported only 6% of the ‘covid’ deaths are related to Covid alone. 94% of the death stats have been serious underlying health issues…

This is not accurate. CDC reported that 94% of deaths had underlying co-morbidities not “serious underlying health issues”. These comorbidities include conditions such as high blood pressure, that many people walk around without knowing. If you get a serious health impact (such as COVID) this can overwhelm your system and kill you but this very different to “they were going to die anyway” of those co morbidities.

Explain why the daily death rate hasn’t spiked while the daily confirmed cases has over time. Where is this 1-2% ratio you speak of?

https://images2.imgbox.com/7e/57/EGGWsUoE_o.png

Daily death rates have followed closely to confirmed cases with the time lag of at least 14-21 days which is the average time it takes to die. Some take longer. The 1-2% ration is there in the image you are using to “prove” its wrong 1% of 300,000 is 3,000 which is exactly where the graph shows it. The reason that the lower graph (death) looks flat is because of the scale of the graph. YOu also have to factor into that the time delay to die.

Take your blinkers off, majority of the covid death stats have been elderly people with underlying chronic conditions such as heart disease, respiratory issues and other severe illnesses.

I agree the VAST majority of COVID deaths are people older than 60. You should go and have a look at what the CDC are calling comorbidities though. You cant assume they are all on the verge of a heart attack. CDC list high blood pressure as a co morbidity.

Hospitals in the US are paid $39,000 if they mark a death by Covid… Scroll down to the video with Senator Jensen.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/24/fact-check-medicare-hospitals-paid-more-covid-19-patients-coronavirus/3000638001/

In Europe and many other countries, they have recently stopped marking deaths by covid in patients who have died with known underlying chronic health issues. It was a flawed stat to begin with.

Please feel free to post your own sources with stats showing how deadly this virus is… I’ve heard nothing in Australia apart from retirement homes deaths & the ruby princess since the outbreak, hardly riveting stuff to lock down the country.

650 of 872 deaths in Aus have been related to Aged Care. You are making an analytical error in using “post lockdown” numbers to justify or otherwise whether or not a lockdown was necessary. If we didnt lockdown, these numbers would have been MUCH higher. I was tracking the numbers early in Mar-April and prelockdown the case numbers were following a very predictable path of exponential growth. This exponential growth would have resulted in expenential increase in deaths.

With regards to your whole argument regarding COVID deaths being overstated due to co morbidities, the CDC did an analysis of this as well and did a study of “excess” deaths (deaths over and above those to be expected by normal demographics and existing morbidities). This shows there have been between 207,000 and 270,000 additional deaths since 1/02/2020 than the normal expectation based on demographics. This correlates pretty closely with the reported death number of 209,000 in the US.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

No one is saying covid doesn’t exist, it may just be a more contagious strain of influenza… Influenza kills too, we don’t lock down borders over that do we?

COVID at the moment is 20 x deadlier that Influenza. The mortality rate for influenza in the US in 2017 was 20 per 1M population for an entire year. The mortality rate right now (POST LOCKDOWN) for COVID is 632 per 1M population over 8 months. If we didnt lockdown it would of course be higher.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/flu.htm

Fear mongering at its best… Wake up

Mate I dont need to be woke. I am capable of reading and analysing actual data and parsing what it means. I dont need to rely on youtube videos. I suggest you get your data from more reliable sources and extrapolate your own opinions.

posted in General Discussion read more

@CocaCola said in Coronavirus Outbreak:

These graphs tell the story.

Covid-19 testing is severely flawed resulting in majority of false positives results. The graphs clearly indicate no direct relation between cases & deaths since day 1.

I will repeat myself, out of all the ‘Covid’ deaths to date, 94% of those deaths have been reported as having previous underlying health issues, you know the type of health issues that make up the majority of death stats on a yearly basis.

In Australia, 19 people under the age of 60 have reportedly died from Covid, only 5 of those under the age of 50. Not quite the ‘deadly’ virus some bang on about. This also doesn’t take into consideration that some of those had underlying health issues.

The media needs to stop this nonsense of reporting ‘new daily cases’ the stats say it means nothing!.

https://images2.imgbox.com/a8/f3/UcYNIQ07_o.png
https://images2.imgbox.com/7e/57/EGGWsUoE_o.png

Sources:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data

https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers#cases-and-deaths-by-age-and-sex

Mate those graphs DO tell the story, the same story as the CDC etc are reporting, trouble is you dont know how to read a graph or understand mathematics.

Those graphs show a clear correlation between cases and deaths and they are running around 1% of cases which is about right. Those graphs look a bit weird because of the scale which doesnt provide detail of the smaller data set (deaths) but it looks right…about 1-2%

posted in General Discussion read more

@formerguest said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

Not to mention of course the ridiculousness of two senate seats for each state regardless of population, especially when there is up to a seventy fold odd discrepancy in their populations, seven with a multiplier above 4000%. Those are huge imbalances, far from democratic and further millions of constituents in many other states also have a disproportionately large say in the national direction.

That imbalance is intentional and again a feature not a bug. As I discussed previously, the whole constitution and US democracy is a constant set of checks and balances. One of these intentional checks and balances is that the Congress is proportional representation and the Senate represents the States equally. This is to protect the small states and ensure the US isnt run by California & NY (although the Dems would love that).

Along the same lines SCOTUS serves a different role in the US than the High Court here. The primary role of SCOTUS is protection of the Constitution and ensuring Congress made law is Constitutional. The three law making arms are Congress, SCOTUS and the Executive (President) and the design is that if one enacts something unconstitutional the other 2 can step in.

posted in General Discussion read more

@formerguest said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Tiger5150 said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@formerguest said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@TillLindemann said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@formerguest said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

The premise of the Republican argument to not accept and have the President’s SCOTUS nominee voted upon in 2016, was THAT THE PEOPLE SHOULD DECIDE IN AN ELECTION YEAR. They made their bed then and should be forced to lay in it, by any means available and time to play equally dirty as the incumbents.

And the Democrats argued in 2016 that it is fine to do it in an election year, because a president is elected for 4 years not 3.

BOTH sides are hypocrites.

Not on this issue, as the goal posts were moved with actions taken, so the precedent has been set by those still in place. This is now a moral issue because of those actions, so those previously involved and anybody that now supports them in allowing this appointment has no morals.

There have been 10 previous occasions where a SCOTUS seat has been vacated in a presidential year where the president and the senate majority were different parties (2016) and the nominee was passed in a vote twice. Red and blue. Was it a moral issue in 2016? Was it a moral issue when the democrats have previously blocked a SCOTUS nominee?

There have been 19 previous occasions when a SCOTUS seat was vacated in a presidential election year where the president and the senate majority were the same (2020) and 17 of 19 times the nominee was passed in a vote red and blue. Trump and McConnell are doing exactly what the constitution says and frankly it makes sense as SCOTUS may be required to decide the election result. Was it a moral issue when Democrats have previously voted on nominees in election years?

Apparently it’s a “moral issue” when a republican acts in a manner contrary to 2016 but when, Biden, Schumer are contradicting their 2016 positions it’s showing their good morals?

The whole thing is a non issue other than the left getting their panties twisted. It’s politics simple. Dems would and have done the same. The DNC should have tapped RBG on the shoulder when they could have but they were too arrogant to think they could lose. If Biden wins there will be likely opportunities to replace up to 3 seats.

Comparing apples and oranges. One party argued a position of it needing to go to the voters, then the Judiciary Chairman further consolidated status of their planted goalposts on the basis of that argument and even went further to state that he would not put forward a nominee after the Primaries had been held prior to the 2018 midterms, which was also after the current excuse for changing his position. Depending on which one they nominate, we could well see her questioned on her own opinions on the 2016 lack of appointment.

Im not comparing apples and oranges, Im comparing what McConnell and the GOP did in 2016 to the 10 other times that the exact same situation arose previously…red and blue. No clearer comparison I wouldnt have thought. 8 out of those previous 10 had exactly the same result as 2016.

They went to the past two elections and won votes based on those lies, that is why it matters, but maybe not to those still willing to swallow the ten or so that have come from their leader day after day for nearly four years now. At least you concede Trump is not a person that is fit to lead the nation, others, well.

Serious point, it seems to me that pretty much everyone of your posts in here ends with a put down of people who dont share your politics. Does that make you feel superior to belittle others? It sure as hell doesnt contribute to interesting or intelligent discussion here.

posted in General Discussion read more

@GNR4LIFE said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@Tiger5150 said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

@GNR4LIFE said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

Read an interesting article today putting forward the notion that Trump targeting Biden’s cognitive behaviour for the last few months could backfire big time in the debates. Considering how much everyone is expecting him to bomb out, the bar isn’t set too high for him to jump over. If Biden goes toe to toe, or even gets the better of him then Trump likes a fool.

Possible but a big if. I would be amazed if Biden agrees to debates

Therein lies the point. First debate next week.The way it’s being built, Trump has more to lose.

Will be interesting. Genuine question, I assume they don’t have teleprompters?

posted in General Discussion read more

@GNR4LIFE said in Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here:

Read an interesting article today putting forward the notion that Trump targeting Biden’s cognitive behaviour for the last few months could backfire big time in the debates. Considering how much everyone is expecting him to bomb out, the bar isn’t set too high for him to jump over. If Biden goes toe to toe, or even gets the better of him then Trump likes a fool.

Possible but a big if. I would be amazed if Biden agrees to debates

posted in Contracts read more

@Swordy said in JAC:

Kerrod Holland? Someone on this forum rates him? That’ll do me.

People are getting on the beers earlier and earlier in the week these days with Covid.

Think you are missing the sarcasm,…