teamsaint

TBH i hadn’t seen the evidence. But having had a look he does have a poor injury record.My man utd fanatic supporting colleague hadn’t mentioned it when we have discussed him !

Not really sure why a 30 year old defender with shed loads of top level experience to run our defence ,which is made up of youngsters, is such a terrible idea. Perhaps we have our eye on other defenders with around 30 England caps. If he can get through plenty of games, and I haven’t seen any evidence that he can’t, I think he could be just the sort of player we need.

Imagine having a defence that has let in 16 more goals than we have, with 2 to play…….. Lukaku scores to add 50% to the chelsea lead…..

I can’t be the only one who has recently run the scenario of relegation ( admittedly very unlikely) and then what kind of team we are left with. It wouldn’t look pretty, would it ? Best hope would be to sell Salisu and JWP for mega bucks and bolster with a few decent top half Championship players.

we are ninth by that criteria , so your hunch was right. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/punktenachrueckstand/wettbewerb/GB1

Regardless of the manager’s abilities or failings, after Ings was sold I doubt many of us would have turned down 40 points with 5 games to go.

This has to be the most dramatic turn round in form I can ever remember. There are no injuries, no bad luck .selections in the main have been pretty standard, despite the odd strange one. ( I know it wouldn’t have changed today, and he isn’t everbody’s favourite, but why is Redmond getting almost zero game time ? ) maybe we had the rub of the green from time to time in that great run, but after the Watford performance today’s result is not really a huge surprise. Other than internal issues, it is hard to see what else could be the problem .

And not an especially easy run in .

Absolutely. But one problem we have is that our good days a are built on the quick passing/good movement and well co-ordinated press. When the slick pass and move isn't functioning well, and sooner or later all teams struggle with keeping that going, you have to fall back on defensive solidity and taking what chances come your way. Until the defence and midfield cover is really sorted out, bad runs are inevitable.

Can anybody give me a good reason why games can’t just be timed with the time the ball is in play, an hour or whatever, and get rid of time wasting at one simple stroke ?

I would have if I had known it was southgate on his own …..

Huddersfield last reached the last 8 of one of the big cup competitions in 71/2. 50 years ago. They deserve a break !!

They did a lot of that at SMS

Yeo, I’m keeping up , thanks so much for the advice. I spend a good deal of time looking at the best info I can find. ONS data, qualified medics and statisticians for example. The infection rates are high in all age groups, vaxxed or unvaxxed, partially vaxxed, have been for ages. Some findings are showing that booster efficacy declines after 10 weeks, and the first two weeks are discounted ( and show high infection rates anyway).and we still don’t have decent all cause mortality comparisons by age and vaxx status. It is completely valid for people to wait for those, and long term safety data. NHS staff faced with the sack probably had to think long and hard about this too,

The benefits in terms of contracting and transmitting are marginal at best. In the latest 4 week figures, just as an illustration, among 18-30 YOs, there were 163k cases vaccinated, 52k unvaccinated. The double jabbed rate in those groups, according to the same report, is approx 60%. vaccination should be a personal medical choice. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043608/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_51.pdf And here is just one .example of a practical issue. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v1.full

i’m not sure what you would call the numbers for deaths in tables 10 a and b, covid, or covid attributed ? The 28 day definition, if nothing else, has been consistently used.For the purposes of this discussion what matters is the proportion of vaxxed and unvaxxed and in particular with reference to the claims of hospital cases being 90% unvaccinated. As regards rates of cases and deaths that you refer to in table 11, as opposed to the absolute numbers in the tables 8 to 10, there is , as the interpretation makes clear I think , a lot of debate among experts about the number of unvaxxed in the population, making the rates open to very wide interpretation. Anyway, Happy Xmas, and lets hope we can forget about this stuff in 2022.

You need to look at tables 8, 9 and 10 a and b .Look at columns 4 and 7 for vaccinated and unvaccinated and then you have to do the addition yourself , or you can look at the age groups on their own. .https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041593/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-50.pdf

I don’t disagree with this at all. My only interest is to counter obvious misrepresentations ,from whatever direction. So the problem with some anecdotal stuff is not about questioning the particular report, but about the weight that these kind of reports are given in the press and media, when other data suggests that they might well be the exception rather than the rule. The “ 90% in hospital are unvaxxed “ stat has been used by a variety of high profile figures very recently including Hilary Jones and Dominic Raab, it hasn’t been properly challenged and it is hugely misleading, based as it is on a tiny number of very exceptional treatments. Getting into nuance in the data is not somethingI want to do, but happy to accept that whatever data we use is open to different interpretation to the one we might put on it. The 28 day thing is indeed arbitrary , and can lead to mis - attribution of cause of death . And this kind of issues applies throughout the data. But I do think we need to try to get the best use of the best available data that we have , and right now, the UKHSA vaccine Surveillance report is that kind of data. It does need interpretation, and in the case of the tables for cases , hospitalisations and deaths some simple addition to obtain , for example, totals for vaxxed and unvaxxed. We are all going to disagree , to a greater or lesser extent, on interpretation.

I’m looking forward to you pointing out any substantial errors in anything that I have posted, As you choose to describe what is probably the best data that we have as “ a load of debatable stats”, there probably isn”t worthwhile further discussion to be had.

You either try to find reliable stats or you don’t. Anecdotal doesn’t mean false. It just means it is a single report based on personal experience, and presented in a very particular way. I’m not questioning his personal report, just its context. At present the UKHSA data in the vaccine surveillance report looks to be one of the more reliable sources of data that we have. I’ll stick with the data for now, even with its flaws.

This is last weeks vaccine surveillance report. Tables 8, 9 and 10 for cases, hospitalisations and deaths https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041593/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-50.pdf

The problem with all of these anecdotal “ 90% of our patients are unvaccinated “ stories is that they simply do not remotely fit the actual UKHSA data, which has current covid attributed deaths as 75% vaccinated. As for vaccine passports,we should be very careful what we wish for . There is no end point, and no guarantee at all that Digital ID , which is certainly the endgame , will stop at punishing the covid unvaccinated.Sooner or later, they will move on to other targets. Definitely not a risk worth taking. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uk-digital-identity-and-attributes-trust-framework

Figures for cases , hospitalisations, and deaths with covid ( not of) are available in the weekly vaccine surveillance report. They are broken down by age group and vaxx status. You might have to do a bit of addition to get overall totals, but recently they have bee. Showing about 65% of emergency admissions vaxxed, and about 75% of deaths among double vaxxed. see tables 8, 9 and 10. Obviously there is interpretation to be done as well, some of which is controversial, but the data is useful information in any case. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041593/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-50.pdf

Well despite your dismissal of all cause mortality reports ( based on who knows what) and leaving aside your pretty baseless claims about me “ cherry picking data” , here is a Professor from Queen Mary university of London, an expert in medical data and decision making, who thinks all cause mortality comparisons are actually important.

Some of the interpretation around the numbers of unvaxxed population have been very controversial, so that needs treating with caution. Estimates of the unvaxxed population on official data vary between around 5 and 10 m, which is clearly a significant difference https://covidactuaries.org/2021/10/27/vaccine-effectiveness-and-population-estimates/ I'm happy to use the data to help build a picture of what is happening, but it is just one report , and there is other data that is also useful. And there are reports , such as all- cause mortality by age and vaxx status that really need producing, to show the full effects of being vaxxed or not, but the govt agencies don't seem to want to do those. I'm just offering the info to those who may not be aware of it, because it is useful, not because the conclusions in its interpretation are infallible.