|
jas88
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xOver the weekend have heard that WU will not be fielding juniors in the NPLVic comp in 2022. Interesting that APL isnt mandating academies like FFA used to... Do All clubs have academies?? Supposed to be FIFA mandated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Not seen that fact before. would you have a source ?
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Not seen that fact before. would you have a source ? Authored by academics, https://theconversation.com/your-unvaccinated-friend-is-roughly-20-times-more-likely-to-give-you-covid-170448I will see if I can find a meme, youtube link, pete evans post or rant from a bulgarian podiatrist as an additional source
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Meaning the chances of the club having to shut down and staff or players isolate increases massively. How did that gym in Sydney have 15 positive cases linked to it. Fully vaxed people only allowed. The simplest way I could put it is if unvaxxed were coming and going in the gym then that figure of 15 linked to the gym and surrounding contacts could be up to 20x more. Look it's really simple linear thinking. That's all I can further add as it really is a waste of time explaining a basic concept, cheers
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Meaning the chances of the club having to shut down and staff or players isolate increases massively. How did that gym in Sydney have 15 positive cases linked to it. Fully vaxed people only allowed. The simplest way I could put it is if unvaxxed were coming and going in the gym then that figure of 15 linked to the gym and surrounding contacts could be up to 20x more. Look it's really simple linear thinking. That's all I can further add as it really is a waste of time explaining a basic concept, cheers And other leagues (EPL?) managed to run without vaccine mandate? seems to be going ok.
|
|
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
It's all pretty logical.
If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin.
On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads).
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). So people are losing their jobs because of a generic “less likely”. And you guys support this. Shameful.
What about natural immunity exemption for people that have already had covid. Surely they don’t need the vaccine.
But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Not seen that fact before. would you have a source ? Authored by academics, https://theconversation.com/your-unvaccinated-friend-is-roughly-20-times-more-likely-to-give-you-covid-170448I will see if I can find a meme, youtube link, pete evans post or rant from a bulgarian podiatrist as an additional source Did you read that article, it isnt actually an academic paper, the author calls it a "thought experiment" (which is a direct quote from the article) and goes on to make wild calculations and assumptions, which are actually a load of crap. Here is some recent research published in The Lancet showing vaxed represent similar risk of transmission as the unvaxed. Jabs do not reduce risk of passing Covid within household, study suggestsResearch reveals fully vaccinated people are just as likely to pass virus on to those they share a home with People who are fully vaccinated against Covid yet catch the virus are just as infectious to others in their household as infected unvaccinated people, research suggests. Now a study has revealed that while vaccination against Covid is crucial to preventing severe disease and death, even fully jabbed individuals catch the virus – and pass it on. Writing in the Lancet, researchers from a number of institutions including Imperial College London and the UK Health Security Agency (HSA) report how they analysed data from 204 household contacts of 138 people infected with the Delta variant. The results suggest even those who are fully vaccinated have a sizeable risk of becoming infected, with analysis revealing a fully vaccinated contact has a 25% chance of catching the virus from an infected household member while an unvaccinated contact has a 38% chance of becoming infected. However, the figures do not shed light on the severity of illness, while the team cautions these figures fall within a range of possible values, meaning the exact size of the difference is unclear. The analysis further suggests that whether an infected individual is themselves fully vaccinated or unvaccinated makes little or no difference to how infectious they are to their household contacts.The team add that the peak level of virus in infected individuals was the same regardless of whether they were jabbed or not, although these levels dropped off more quickly in the vaccinated people, suggesting they cleared the infection sooner. “This likely explains why [fully vaccinated] breakthrough cases are as infectious to their contacts as [unvaccinated] cases” said Prof Ajit Lalvani, chair of infectious diseases at Imperial College London and an author of the study. The team also looked more closely at those who were fully vaccinated. “What we found, surprisingly, was that already by three months after receipt of the second vaccine dose, the risk of acquiring infection was higher compared to being more recently vaccinated,” said Lalvani. “This suggests that vaccine-induced protection is already waning by about three months post-secondary,” he added. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/28/covid-vaccinated-likely-unjabbed-infect-cohabiters-study-suggests
|
|
|
|
|
Davide82
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for. Calling the 90% peasants when the 10% will be marginalised and sick, rightly or wrongly, is an odd use of the word peasant. Are you 10% the true rulers of us peasants or are the rulers also vaccinated and not locked out of places......
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Wow, another thread. Don't people know that this thread is for people that want to shit on Western United.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWow, another thread. Don't people know that this thread is for people that want to shit on Western United. Yeah guys, you'r all derailing the thread, talking about the wrong "peasants" hahahahahahahahahahah
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for. Calling the 90% peasants when the 10% will be marginalised and sick, rightly or wrongly, is an odd use of the word peasant. Are you 10% the true rulers of us peasants or are the rulers also vaccinated and not locked out of places...... Not 90% peasants. Just the ones that are hardcore fundamentalist vaxxers that look at the unvaxxed as lepers who don't deserve to be part of society. Kind of like the hardcore anti vaxxer conspiracy theorist. The marginal extremes on either side. One and the same. The bulk of us are in the middle. Just want to get on with life and let everyone choose to take whatever precautions they need for their own and family safety. Especially for a virus with a 99.95% survival rate for the young and healthy Don't expect others to follow what we do. The extremists in any ideology demand everyone do as they say. Case in point.
|
|
|
|
|
Davide82
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for. Calling the 90% peasants when the 10% will be marginalised and sick, rightly or wrongly, is an odd use of the word peasant. Are you 10% the true rulers of us peasants or are the rulers also vaccinated and not locked out of places...... Not 90% peasants. Just the ones that are hardcore fundamentalist vaxxers that look at the unvaxxed as lepers who don't deserve to be part of society. Kind of like the hardcore anti vaxxer conspiracy theorist. The marginal extremes on either side. One and the same. The bulk of us are in the middle. Just want to get on with life and let everyone choose to take whatever precautions they need for their own and family safety. Especially for a virus with a 99.95% survival rate for the young and healthy Don't expect others to follow what we do. The extremists in any ideology demand everyone do as they say. Case in point. Was just having a bit of fun man, settle down aha For someone "in the middle" and not "hardcore" on either side you sure do seem riled up
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for. Calling the 90% peasants when the 10% will be marginalised and sick, rightly or wrongly, is an odd use of the word peasant. Are you 10% the true rulers of us peasants or are the rulers also vaccinated and not locked out of places...... Not 90% peasants. Just the ones that are hardcore fundamentalist vaxxers that look at the unvaxxed as lepers who don't deserve to be part of society. Kind of like the hardcore anti vaxxer conspiracy theorist. The marginal extremes on either side. One and the same. The bulk of us are in the middle. Just want to get on with life and let everyone choose to take whatever precautions they need for their own and family safety. Especially for a virus with a 99.95% survival rate for the young and healthy Don't expect others to follow what we do. The extremists in any ideology demand everyone do as they say. Case in point. Was just having a bit of fun man, settle down aha For someone "in the middle" and not "hardcore" on either side you sure do seem riled up I just think it's wrong people losing their livelihoods. And people are supporting this vehemently I understand high risk positions working with vulnerable people. But the sports world. Young healthy people in their prime? Let them choose to do what they want.
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for. Calling the 90% peasants when the 10% will be marginalised and sick, rightly or wrongly, is an odd use of the word peasant. Are you 10% the true rulers of us peasants or are the rulers also vaccinated and not locked out of places...... Not 90% peasants. Just the ones that are hardcore fundamentalist vaxxers that look at the unvaxxed as lepers who don't deserve to be part of society. Kind of like the hardcore anti vaxxer conspiracy theorist. The marginal extremes on either side. One and the same. The bulk of us are in the middle. Just want to get on with life and let everyone choose to take whatever precautions they need for their own and family safety. Especially for a virus with a 99.95% survival rate for the young and healthy Don't expect others to follow what we do. The extremists in any ideology demand everyone do as they say. Case in point. Was just having a bit of fun man, settle down aha For someone "in the middle" and not "hardcore" on either side you sure do seem riled up I just think it's wrong people losing their livelihoods. And people are supporting this vehemently I understand high risk positions working with vulnerable people. But the sports world. Young healthy people in their prime? Let them choose to do what they want. The precedent is being set and its being supported From now on the Govt can use us as a control method. Even if the next virus is less deadly and the drugs less effective.
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Not seen that fact before. would you have a source ? Authored by academics, https://theconversation.com/your-unvaccinated-friend-is-roughly-20-times-more-likely-to-give-you-covid-170448I will see if I can find a meme, youtube link, pete evans post or rant from a bulgarian podiatrist as an additional source Did you read that article, it isnt actually an academic paper, the author calls it a "thought experiment" (which is a direct quote from the article) and goes on to make wild calculations and assumptions, which are actually a load of crap. Here is some recent research published in The Lancet showing vaxed represent similar risk of transmission as the unvaxed. Jabs do not reduce risk of passing Covid within household, study suggestsResearch reveals fully vaccinated people are just as likely to pass virus on to those they share a home with People who are fully vaccinated against Covid yet catch the virus are just as infectious to others in their household as infected unvaccinated people, research suggests. Now a study has revealed that while vaccination against Covid is crucial to preventing severe disease and death, even fully jabbed individuals catch the virus – and pass it on. Writing in the Lancet, researchers from a number of institutions including Imperial College London and the UK Health Security Agency (HSA) report how they analysed data from 204 household contacts of 138 people infected with the Delta variant. The results suggest even those who are fully vaccinated have a sizeable risk of becoming infected, with analysis revealing a fully vaccinated contact has a 25% chance of catching the virus from an infected household member while an unvaccinated contact has a 38% chance of becoming infected. However, the figures do not shed light on the severity of illness, while the team cautions these figures fall within a range of possible values, meaning the exact size of the difference is unclear. The analysis further suggests that whether an infected individual is themselves fully vaccinated or unvaccinated makes little or no difference to how infectious they are to their household contacts.The team add that the peak level of virus in infected individuals was the same regardless of whether they were jabbed or not, although these levels dropped off more quickly in the vaccinated people, suggesting they cleared the infection sooner. “This likely explains why [fully vaccinated] breakthrough cases are as infectious to their contacts as [unvaccinated] cases” said Prof Ajit Lalvani, chair of infectious diseases at Imperial College London and an author of the study. The team also looked more closely at those who were fully vaccinated. “What we found, surprisingly, was that already by three months after receipt of the second vaccine dose, the risk of acquiring infection was higher compared to being more recently vaccinated,” said Lalvani. “This suggests that vaccine-induced protection is already waning by about three months post-secondary,” he added. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/28/covid-vaccinated-likely-unjabbed-infect-cohabiters-study-suggests Yeah. Looked up that 20 times more likely crap too. No real scientific evidence cited. Just leads to divisiveness and hatred. And people believe it. And that's why people say media is the virus. Irresponsible journalism at the least. https://youtu.be/LhpI23fynEELeads me to believe this is pretty accurate and what our democratically elected leaders think.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
I don't get how a coaching failure like Aloisi can still convince clubs to give him a gig.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xHeard from someone in the team that they have players and a coach training away from the group as they are antivaxxers. Not sure if its been reported already and this was a few weeks back so mightve changed And considering they are healthy young athletes I don't see anything wrong with it. besides the obvious, what about the fact that they are 20 times more likely to pass it on to someone - Not seen that fact before. would you have a source ? Authored by academics, https://theconversation.com/your-unvaccinated-friend-is-roughly-20-times-more-likely-to-give-you-covid-170448I will see if I can find a meme, youtube link, pete evans post or rant from a bulgarian podiatrist as an additional source Did you read that article, it isnt actually an academic paper, the author calls it a "thought experiment" (which is a direct quote from the article) and goes on to make wild calculations and assumptions, which are actually a load of crap. Here is some recent research published in The Lancet showing vaxed represent similar risk of transmission as the unvaxed. Jabs do not reduce risk of passing Covid within household, study suggestsResearch reveals fully vaccinated people are just as likely to pass virus on to those they share a home with People who are fully vaccinated against Covid yet catch the virus are just as infectious to others in their household as infected unvaccinated people, research suggests. Now a study has revealed that while vaccination against Covid is crucial to preventing severe disease and death, even fully jabbed individuals catch the virus – and pass it on. Writing in the Lancet, researchers from a number of institutions including Imperial College London and the UK Health Security Agency (HSA) report how they analysed data from 204 household contacts of 138 people infected with the Delta variant. The results suggest even those who are fully vaccinated have a sizeable risk of becoming infected, with analysis revealing a fully vaccinated contact has a 25% chance of catching the virus from an infected household member while an unvaccinated contact has a 38% chance of becoming infected. However, the figures do not shed light on the severity of illness, while the team cautions these figures fall within a range of possible values, meaning the exact size of the difference is unclear. The analysis further suggests that whether an infected individual is themselves fully vaccinated or unvaccinated makes little or no difference to how infectious they are to their household contacts.The team add that the peak level of virus in infected individuals was the same regardless of whether they were jabbed or not, although these levels dropped off more quickly in the vaccinated people, suggesting they cleared the infection sooner. “This likely explains why [fully vaccinated] breakthrough cases are as infectious to their contacts as [unvaccinated] cases” said Prof Ajit Lalvani, chair of infectious diseases at Imperial College London and an author of the study. The team also looked more closely at those who were fully vaccinated. “What we found, surprisingly, was that already by three months after receipt of the second vaccine dose, the risk of acquiring infection was higher compared to being more recently vaccinated,” said Lalvani. “This suggests that vaccine-induced protection is already waning by about three months post-secondary,” he added. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/28/covid-vaccinated-likely-unjabbed-infect-cohabiters-study-suggests Yeah. Looked up that 20 times more likely crap too. No real scientific evidence cited. Just leads to divisiveness and hatred. And people believe it. And that's why people say media is the virus. Irresponsible journalism at the least. https://youtu.be/LhpI23fynEELeads me to believe this is pretty accurate and what our democratically elected leaders think. This statement is actually key: As the prevalence of COVID changes over time, it’s hard to estimate an absolute risk of exposure. So instead, we need to think about risks in a relative sense.
This is a common ploy in modern scientific research to overstate the real risks of a disease (or the benefits of treatment) so as to find significance where in fact there is very little, ultimately to push an agenda, be that political, financial, increased funding, whatever. If its too hard to establish absolute risks and its not been established then you simply don't know what the real risks are. If something has a 0.05% absolute risk and that risk doubles, the relative risk is 200%, which sounds huge, but the real risk is still just 0.1% ie 99.9% are still safe. More and more scientific publications are quoting relative risks Its a huge problem. The Conversation website is supposed to be "academically rigorous". Its not.
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
😂✌🏻
|
|
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
I would have thought we now have stacks of solid data to determine the relative risk quite accurately.
Just stop being dickheads and get vaccinated.
|
|
|
|
|
Butler99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI would have thought we now have stacks of solid data to determine the relative risk quite accurately. Just stop being dickheads and get vaccinated. Once again Just worry about you and yours. Let everyone else worry about theirs. "Our ideology is intolerant...and peremptorily demands...the complete transformation of public life to its ideas."
Adolf Hitler
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Lock and ban.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI would have thought we now have stacks of solid data to determine the relative risk quite accurately. Just stop being dickheads and get vaccinated. I think you've completely missed the point or you don't know what relative risk actually is. Relative risks mean little without knowing the absolute risks, which is what people need to make an informed decision about risk versus benefit. A tiny risk is still a tiny risk even if it is doubled. A tiny benefit is still a tiny benefit even if doubled,.. And the article clearly says they don't know the absolute risks.
|
|
|
|
|
paladisious
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 39K,
Visits: 0
|
Let's move the covid talk over to the relevant thread lads, cheers.
|
|
|
|
|
aussie pride
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
I see WU signed Christian Theohaurus (sp).
Was a real shame he left MV so prematurely when Muscy was phasing him into the team and giving him the impact sub role.
I understand you need to chase your dreams but it’s no surprise that not a lot was achieved in Germany for him.
|
|
|
|
|
Feed_The_Brox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIt's all pretty logical. If being double vaxxed, you're both less likely to get it, AND less likely to pass it on in the case where you do actually get it, and everyone around you is also double vaxxed, then, it follows that across the population, you will have lower infection rates, and you, your family, and friends will be safer by a significant margin. On the other hand if 20% of the population are absolute dickheads, then the risk necessarily goes up (and our health system gets uncessarily clogged by dickheads). So people are losing their jobs because of a generic “less likely”. And you guys support this. Shameful.
What about natural immunity exemption for people that have already had covid. Surely they don’t need the vaccine.
But everyone is silent on that. But it’s all about the public health. And greater good. And any other wanky slogan peasants fall for. People made the choice to not get vaxxed and lose their job... no sympathy. Even the evil Murdoch Media have mandated vaccine for their staff in Australia. "natural immunity” is a myth that has been debunked. The claim that you can’t catch COVID twice has been debunked. +xCalling the 90% peasants when the 10% will be marginalised and sick, rightly or wrongly, is an odd use of the word peasant. Are you 10% the true rulers of us peasants or are the rulers also vaccinated and not locked out of places...... NSW is pushing 94% single vaxxed. VIC is pushing 92%. We will end up with 99% or close to it. then we will have 5-11 year old’s who will be eligible before Xmas. With cases reducing in VIC and NSW while open, people can’t argue vaccines don’t work
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+xI don't get how a coaching failure like Aloisi can still convince clubs to give him a gig. have said it before, you score the most famous penalty in Aus football history and you get a golden ticket for life!!
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI don't get how a coaching failure like Aloisi can still convince clubs to give him a gig. have said it before, you score the most famous penalty in Aus football history and you get a golden ticket for life!! Definitely seems that way. That being said, I still like the guy and it would be genuinely great for him to succeed as a coach. Not convinced that will happen at WU though and this is probably his last chance at this level.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+xI don't get how a coaching failure like Aloisi can still convince clubs to give him a gig. have said it before, you score the most famous penalty in Aus football history and you get a golden ticket for life!! Definitely seems that way. That being said, I still like the guy and it would be genuinely great for him to succeed as a coach. Not convinced that will happen at WU though and this is probably his last chance at this level. I have met him a few times and he is a genuinely nice guy, just no good as a coach, whereas Muscat on the other hand is another story...
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI don't get how a coaching failure like Aloisi can still convince clubs to give him a gig. He’s not the best coach but he’s hardly a failure either. There are worse coaches around who don’t cop anywhere near as much flack as he does. I’d take him over our coach tbh.
|
|
|
|