Bit more on the shoddy way the cowardly Australians went about this. They advised the World Cup organisers by WhatsApp and they intend to play New Zealand in the autumn whilst the World Cup is going on.

The IRL have confirmed that would lead to legal action and sanctions against the ARlC and NZRL.

The way cases are deliberatey conflated with infections is precisely meant to not look good. There is stastically hardly any coronavirus of any kind at this time of year, hence why respiratory deaths as underlying cause (when you don't falsify deaths) drop like a stone at this time of year. You only need look at the stats at ONS year on year, this is a classic Gompertz curve.

However the 'cases' keep rising due to the tests been used that are a weapon against humanity, hence the term 'casedemic' and now pingdemic.
The reaction using the 'cases' as the basis for it just plays the game of bowing to the projection of a pandemic/health problem when there is none, except that created by those saying there is a pandemic/health problem. The biggest issue right now is not just the toxic agent injected into people that causes influenza like symptoms - which are now 'covid' symptoms, in a significant number of those taking the jab (as per the manufacturers own data), it's the continued use of tests that cannot, and never could detect infection, hence you have casedemic, rising cases are in themselves utterly meaningless because of that, they indicate nothing except for the reality of deception and false health information by governments and so called health agencies.

So it's not surprising that the respective natinal rugby league bodies come out with a statement like that despite it been based on a pack of lies regards public health, they neither have the ability to grasp that cases aren't infections (even though this is obvious and the government never state that cases are infections, only the media), nor do they have the authority to challenge the narrative, even if they did they would be pilloried.

It also makes a bit of a mockery of having the jabs, surely if the reason for having them is to prevent 'covid' then you're protected right, otherwise what was the point exactly?
But whatever, RL is pretty much FUBAR with or without the WC going ahead, fans are losing intereest and income streams are dwindling faster than a nightclub owner post mandated jab for 'crowded' places.

If it still goes ahead and there are no crowds again, the tournament is going to lose a hell of a lot of money, there's no guarantee that next year is workable, fans will be wanting their money back. This is part of the regime/plan, to destroy society to coerce people getting jabs and 'booosters' and if businesses/community projects and wider public health falls by the wayside, so be it.

Cases will continue to be blamed on the unvaxxed (simply by changing the CT of PCR as is being done right as we speak, just read the CDC documents as to how you easily manipulate testing/cases for vaxxed v unvaxxed), and this is all part of the push to have everyone jagged up, rugby players included, even if that doesn't protect you, which is the paradox currently.

Play, don't play, I think a fair few ans right now actually don't care, the money I would have spent is going into what's left of grass roots rugby locally to me. If the pro game folds, so be it, but that will be on the tyrannical globalists, their lackeys and the people submitting to the insane regime. By complying, people have actually helped crush RL and everything else in our world.

I agree with much of that and believe me the whole 'covid' thing didn't alter the way I live my life one iota as at worst I would catch an illness and my immune system as usual will fight it. The whole wearing masks, social distancing and closing down a whole country seemed ludicrous to me when even if you accept the case numbers the fatalities are miniscule.

I still don't understand though why Super League suffers so much disruption to the competition compared to other sports.

Wow!!!

Wearing masks and social distancing was totally correct. I will argue lockdown never needed to be so long and that's about it. The alternative was be like Sweden and do nothing to get herd immunity. That never worked out too well for them.

How about India and how there government mishandled things.

Not sure where the wow comes from when the end result for the vast majority of people under 40 test positive for covid suffer exactly that. Mild to more severe flu like symptoms and then a full recovery.

As someone who has never had the flu, does not get ill often and for all I know I could have already had covid as they tell us you may not
get symptoms then yes I'll take my chances with my immune system.

risks of death 0.0074%. Forgive me for not freaking out over such odds.

Quote kobashi="kobashi"Wearing masks and social distancing was totally correct. I will argue lockdown never needed to be so long and that's about it. The alternative was be like Sweden and do nothing to get herd immunity. That never worked out too well for them. How about India and how there government mishandled things.'" Social distancing I get but outdoor events didn't need to be closed for as long as they were as the risk of contracting such a virus outdoors is low. Rememeber the BLM protests or those pictures of thousands hitting the beach and detractors were saying how expect a huge surge in covid cases due to the close proximity of people. Those huge spikes never occurred after as being outside there practically has to be the perfect scenario for the virus to transfer to someone else. No evidence has ever been produced which shows masks make any significant difference. https://messaging-custom-newsletters.ny ... 122f8093b6 Quote kobashiWhen the s for Disease Control and Prevention released new guidelines last month for mask wearing, it announced that “less than 10 percent” of Covid-19 transmission was occurring outdoors. Media organizations repeated the statistic, and it quickly became a standard description of the frequency of outdoor transmission. But the number is almost certainly misleading. It appears to be based partly on a misclassification of some Covid transmission that actually took place in enclosed spaces (as I explain below). An even bigger issue is the extreme caution of C.D.C. officials, who picked a benchmark — 10 percent — so high that nobody could reasonably dispute it. That benchmark “seems to be a huge exaggeration,” as Dr. Muge Cevik, a virologist at the University of St. Andrews, said. In truth, the share of transmission that has occurred outdoors seems to be below 1 percent and may be below 0.1 percent, multiple epidemiologists told me. The rare outdoor transmission that has happened almost all seems to have involved crowded places or close conversation. '" 0.1 - 1% chance of transmission outdoors is ridiculously low to even worry about covid

Quote kobashi="kobashi"Wearing masks and social distancing was totally correct. I will argue lockdown never needed to be so long and that's about it. The alternative was be like Sweden and do nothing to get herd immunity. That never worked out too well for them. How about India and how there government mishandled things.'" Social distancing I get but outdoor events didn't need to be closed for as long as they were as the risk of contracting such a virus outdoors is low. Rememeber the BLM protests or those pictures of thousands hitting the beach and detractors were saying how expect a huge surge in covid cases due to the close proximity of people. Those huge spikes never occurred after as being outside there practically has to be the perfect scenario for the virus to transfer to someone else. No evidence has ever been produced which shows masks make any significant difference. https://messaging-custom-newsletters.ny ... 122f8093b6 Quote kobashiWhen the s for Disease Control and Prevention released new guidelines last month for mask wearing, it announced that “less than 10 percent” of Covid-19 transmission was occurring outdoors. Media organizations repeated the statistic, and it quickly became a standard description of the frequency of outdoor transmission. But the number is almost certainly misleading. It appears to be based partly on a misclassification of some Covid transmission that actually took place in enclosed spaces (as I explain below). An even bigger issue is the extreme caution of C.D.C. officials, who picked a benchmark — 10 percent — so high that nobody could reasonably dispute it. That benchmark “seems to be a huge exaggeration,” as Dr. Muge Cevik, a virologist at the University of St. Andrews, said. In truth, the share of transmission that has occurred outdoors seems to be below 1 percent and may be below 0.1 percent, multiple epidemiologists told me. The rare outdoor transmission that has happened almost all seems to have involved crowded places or close conversation. '" 0.1 - 1% chance of transmission outdoors is ridiculously low to even worry about covid

Quote kobashi="kobashi"Wearing masks and social distancing was totally correct. I will argue lockdown never needed to be so long and that's about it. The alternative was be like Sweden and do nothing to get herd immunity. That never worked out too well for them. How about India and how there government mishandled things.'" Masks only make outcomes worse, much like the majority of so called PPE, studies done in operating theatres prove that infections are more prevelent when masks are worn against non mask wearing. You need to have a basic grasp of what PPE actually is, why it's always the last form of having positive health and safety outcomes as well as k owing risk compenation/risk homeostasis means. 'Social distancing' also has a huge overall negative impact on pubic health. Removing the elderly from family and friends causing even greater isolation is one of the singularly biggest causes of advanced death, this includes the effects of mental health as a whole, several studies have been done on this, the increase in mortality is 26% according to this, !https://www.pnas.org/content/110/15/5797 see also this study where it raises to a peak 48% increase https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/behin ... 4-04-2013/ We also know that social distancing has a massive effect on all age groups, children particularly are negatively affected, we know for a fact that suicides/suicide attempts have increased around 69% according to London Ambulance service, being socially isoltated and social distanced has a massive impact on people's mental health, to ignore that isn't just niave. https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-n ... e-19183036 that's before you even get to the billions spent on enforcing social distancing that could have been spent on proper health and social care in communities. As for Sweden, please explain what didn't work out too well for them?

Quote kobashi="kobashi"Wearing masks and social distancing was totally correct. I will argue lockdown never needed to be so long and that's about it. The alternative was be like Sweden and do nothing to get herd immunity. That never worked out too well for them. How about India and how there government mishandled things.'" Masks only make outcomes worse, much like the majority of so called PPE, studies done in operating theatres prove that infections are more prevelent when masks are worn against non mask wearing. You need to have a basic grasp of what PPE actually is, why it's always the last form of having positive health and safety outcomes as well as k owing risk compenation/risk homeostasis means. 'Social distancing' also has a huge overall negative impact on pubic health. Removing the elderly from family and friends causing even greater isolation is one of the singularly biggest causes of advanced death, this includes the effects of mental health as a whole, several studies have been done on this, the increase in mortality is 26% according to this, !https://www.pnas.org/content/110/15/5797 see also this study where it raises to a peak 48% increase https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/behin ... 4-04-2013/ We also know that social distancing has a massive effect on all age groups, children particularly are negatively affected, we know for a fact that suicides/suicide attempts have increased around 69% according to London Ambulance service, being socially isoltated and social distanced has a massive impact on people's mental health, to ignore that isn't just niave. https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-n ... e-19183036 that's before you even get to the billions spent on enforcing social distancing that could have been spent on proper health and social care in communities. As for Sweden, please explain what didn't work out too well for them?

What a self centred attitude, your ok so stuff the rest. Please how you can explain to my next door neighbour why she is now a widow & why she is still ill with the effects of this awful virus.. they may well have caught it from someone under 40 who had no symptoms. It has always been about protecting the vulnerable not those at low risk.

No it has always been about protecting the NHS and making sure it didn't crumble.

The government don't care about such a small number of deaths, what they wanted to stop was hospitalisations.

Self ed? No.

I had no issue accepting from early on the virus was here and we have to live with it rather than locking down industries for so long and making everyone stsy in there homes fior months on end a better balance was to be met. Having things like cancer treatments, life changing surgeries etc put on the back burner for months on end was ridiculous.

You hang in there buddy....You're special

That's the spirit...