|
FORUMS > Hull FC > 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus |
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 165 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2019 | 5 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Apr 2021 | Mar 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
: |
|
| Quote: supercat "Just listened to a small segment of AP’s interview and apparently the player mentioned turned up with symptoms. Why the hell would he turn up and surely the club have told any player if you have anything such as a sniffle don’t even turn up. He could have them been tested and they would have caught this before the player got anywhere near the treatment room.'"
This makes it even worse. Unforgivable and completely avoidable. Tevita Pangai was sacked for a much less serious breach. I would argue the player in question here deserves the same punishment.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 238 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
May 2020 | 5 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2021 | Mar 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
78055_1588880919.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_78055.jpg |
|
|
Quote: Mild Rover "You want us to compare a % value per 10,000 population (which is itself a nonsense) for positive tests with a value per 100,000 for hospitalizations? That's taking apples an oranges to an extreme. If you're talking about a PCR test detecting specific 'dead organic material' (it's debatable whether viruses are a form of life, anyway) that isn't a false positive. It's how the test works. A false positive would be if you got a signal from your negative control, in which case the test has failed and would be rejected.
Based solely on your set up, it is impossible to tell. That sentence is 108 words, by the way, and pretty much impenetrable. Now, I've read a couple Gabriel Garcia Marquez novels. I'm not frightened of long sentences, but I can't p that bugger.
The genome of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has been sequenced. There's been a big effort to get all published scientific material on the virus and disease available freely online.
I said a comparison % of test positives for covid v influenza at same time of year this year for C.19 and last year for influenza, bother to read correctly. 0.55% of all covid tests are + v 0.81% positive test rate for all flu tests. It's precisely the same comparison!
No gold standard ever established, the PCR test itself is the standard which is utter bunk!
You also get false positives because dead organic cells are dead, ergo cannot have any bearing on infection, WHO admit this is a massive flaw, yet still triggers a positive with the PCR test, it's not rocket science.
here, go educate yourself https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/cov ... aningless/ https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/04 ... stic-test/
There's evidence that the markers of COVID exist in all human DNA
Basing your response on character/word length in a sentence is about all you've got isn't it The facts bear out that the risk is significantly less than for influenza in August last year (which is already very small) in terms of tests despite the mass testing by the millions, the number of deaths WITH a non isolated virus using a flawed test are dwarfed by other respiratory disease deaths were the persons have died FROM - as in underlying cause of death (the only way to accurately code a death on the register), the risk is tiny.
Excess deaths fell because people began to actually see to their vulnerable relatives, those already left to rot, left to DNR, died of their underlying health conditions (as per Neil ferguson's own words back in March), the excess deaths flattened. people were not dying of C.19 in the first instance. If you remove healthcare in hospitals, remove staff from critical care wards by the thousands to man Covid wards (A government edict produced in an NHS document stating precisely that), remove care in care homes and in the wider community, making people fearful to even seek emergency care, stop essential procedures (my stepdaughters friend is now going to die because her cancer treatments were stopped) then you get a lot of people dying from their underlying conditions. Testing positive post death with that flawed test, or no test at all, or attributing C.19 instead of pneumonia (again another gov edict to change how death certificates were filed in) is yet more bunk in terms of fudging the death toll and making out that most of the deaths were FROM C.19 when they simply weren't.
There are massively fewer people to die, even ONS state that the levelling off is due to the fact that people dying prematurely with their underlying health condition means a drop in deaths!
Wake up for gods sakes
|
|
Quote: Mild Rover "You want us to compare a % value per 10,000 population (which is itself a nonsense) for positive tests with a value per 100,000 for hospitalizations? That's taking apples an oranges to an extreme. If you're talking about a PCR test detecting specific 'dead organic material' (it's debatable whether viruses are a form of life, anyway) that isn't a false positive. It's how the test works. A false positive would be if you got a signal from your negative control, in which case the test has failed and would be rejected.
Based solely on your set up, it is impossible to tell. That sentence is 108 words, by the way, and pretty much impenetrable. Now, I've read a couple Gabriel Garcia Marquez novels. I'm not frightened of long sentences, but I can't p that bugger.
The genome of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has been sequenced. There's been a big effort to get all published scientific material on the virus and disease available freely online.
I said a comparison % of test positives for covid v influenza at same time of year this year for C.19 and last year for influenza, bother to read correctly. 0.55% of all covid tests are + v 0.81% positive test rate for all flu tests. It's precisely the same comparison!
No gold standard ever established, the PCR test itself is the standard which is utter bunk!
You also get false positives because dead organic cells are dead, ergo cannot have any bearing on infection, WHO admit this is a massive flaw, yet still triggers a positive with the PCR test, it's not rocket science.
here, go educate yourself https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/cov ... aningless/ https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/04 ... stic-test/
There's evidence that the markers of COVID exist in all human DNA
Basing your response on character/word length in a sentence is about all you've got isn't it The facts bear out that the risk is significantly less than for influenza in August last year (which is already very small) in terms of tests despite the mass testing by the millions, the number of deaths WITH a non isolated virus using a flawed test are dwarfed by other respiratory disease deaths were the persons have died FROM - as in underlying cause of death (the only way to accurately code a death on the register), the risk is tiny.
Excess deaths fell because people began to actually see to their vulnerable relatives, those already left to rot, left to DNR, died of their underlying health conditions (as per Neil ferguson's own words back in March), the excess deaths flattened. people were not dying of C.19 in the first instance. If you remove healthcare in hospitals, remove staff from critical care wards by the thousands to man Covid wards (A government edict produced in an NHS document stating precisely that), remove care in care homes and in the wider community, making people fearful to even seek emergency care, stop essential procedures (my stepdaughters friend is now going to die because her cancer treatments were stopped) then you get a lot of people dying from their underlying conditions. Testing positive post death with that flawed test, or no test at all, or attributing C.19 instead of pneumonia (again another gov edict to change how death certificates were filed in) is yet more bunk in terms of fudging the death toll and making out that most of the deaths were FROM C.19 when they simply weren't.
There are massively fewer people to die, even ONS state that the levelling off is due to the fact that people dying prematurely with their underlying health condition means a drop in deaths!
Wake up for gods sakes
|
|
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 12646 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2007 | 17 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
33809_1522680904.png 'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_33809.png |
Moderator
|
| Quote: 48756c6c20 524c4643 "I said a comparison % of test positives for covid v influenza at same time of year this year for C.19 and last year for influenza, bother to read correctly. 0.55% of all covid tests are + v 0.81% positive test rate for all flu tests. It's precisely the same comparison!
No gold standard ever established, the PCR test itself is the standard which is utter bunk!
You also get false positives because dead organic cells are dead, ergo cannot have any bearing on infection, WHO admit this is a massive flaw, yet still triggers a positive with the PCR test, it's not rocket science.
here, go educate yourself
Thank you for sharing the links - they explain a lot about how you came to your conclusions. It is an online world I have heard of but not seen before. While it holds a certain scary fascination, I’ll stick with more traditional sources of evidence and interpretation.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 6734 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2021 | Jun 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
3738_1390436317.gif The referee's indecision is final:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_3738.gif |
|
| Well thank christ there's a rugby match coming soon
| | | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 22194 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Sep 2003 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
7078_1361913407.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_7078.jpg |
|
| Catalans v Leeds on Monday 7th has been postponed due to the Dragons being quarantined.
It's going to be a real issue fitting all these rearranged games in should there be any more clubs with positive tests.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 5193 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2024 | Mar 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
20333_1393344959.gif Current thoughts - Mago out or get running up them plantations, get fit or get rid.
Maybe a back up halfback, someone with a bit of experience on a short term deal.
Big tall strong running second rower, like a McMeekin or Sironen type back rower.:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_20333.gif |
|
| Quote: Isaiah "'"
I once stood on a TV plug, it hurt like buggery, you might be right.
| | |
| |
|
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2024 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
1.70849609375:5
|
|
POSTS | ONLINE | REGISTRATIONS | RECORD | 19.65M | 1,639 ↓-91 | 80,155 | 14,103 |
| LOGIN HERE or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
|
RLFANS Match Centre
Mens Betfred Super League XXVIII ROUND : 1 | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
Wigan |
29 |
768 |
338 |
430 |
48 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Hull KR |
29 |
731 |
344 |
387 |
44 |
Warrington |
29 |
769 |
351 |
418 |
42 |
Leigh |
29 |
580 |
442 |
138 |
33 |
Salford |
28 |
556 |
561 |
-5 |
32 |
St.Helens |
28 |
618 |
411 |
207 |
30 |
|
Catalans |
27 |
475 |
427 |
48 |
30 |
Leeds |
27 |
530 |
488 |
42 |
28 |
Huddersfield |
27 |
468 |
658 |
-190 |
20 |
Castleford |
27 |
425 |
735 |
-310 |
15 |
Hull FC |
27 |
328 |
894 |
-566 |
6 |
LondonB |
27 |
317 |
916 |
-599 |
6 |
Betfred Championship 2024 ROUND : 1 | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
Wakefield |
27 |
1032 |
275 |
757 |
52 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Toulouse |
26 |
765 |
388 |
377 |
37 |
Bradford |
28 |
723 |
420 |
303 |
36 |
York |
29 |
695 |
501 |
194 |
32 |
Widnes |
27 |
561 |
502 |
59 |
29 |
Featherstone |
27 |
634 |
525 |
109 |
28 |
|
Sheffield |
26 |
626 |
526 |
100 |
28 |
Doncaster |
26 |
498 |
619 |
-121 |
25 |
Halifax |
26 |
509 |
650 |
-141 |
22 |
Batley |
26 |
422 |
591 |
-169 |
22 |
Swinton |
28 |
484 |
676 |
-192 |
20 |
Barrow |
25 |
442 |
720 |
-278 |
19 |
Whitehaven |
25 |
437 |
826 |
-389 |
18 |
Dewsbury |
27 |
348 |
879 |
-531 |
4 |
Hunslet |
1 |
6 |
10 |
-4 |
0 |
|