maxjam

14 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Trouble is, there doesn't seem to be any recent study to assess how many left the sector due to the threat of the mandate, or how many may have returned since it was scrapped. The Guardian article barely mentions it and the NT one is speculation as to what might happen.

No, just articles at the time saying thousands had left and wouldn't return, and current figures now showing 50k have left during the past year. 

I think the Govt is in enough trouble without commissioning studies into an entirely predictable problem they directly caused ? 

14 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I appreciate that some patients and families may be so desperate for care that they aren't bothered about an unvaccinated person looking after their relative, but I still hold the view that if you work in the health sector and aren't willing to do everything you can to protect patients, you're probably in the wrong job even if the country needs you.

As opposed to leaving thousands without care or insufficient care and causing bed blocking that is adding to already long NHS queues?

All for something that doesn't even prevent transmission.

Might be an idea to pay the buggers more and entice people back into the profession.  Not gonna happen, but we can hope.

10 minutes ago, Crewton said:

The proposed mandatory vaccination for care home and health workers was repealed before the cut-off date came into force. Some care workers undoubtedly decide to leave the sector because of this impending deadline, though I don't know where your 40,000 figure comes from. Allot of care workers left the sector because they were either burnt-out and/or could earn better pay more easily working for Amazon, say. The sector has struggled to replace these people because the government's immigration policy has made it harder to recruit overseas staff - that's not the vaccine's doing. I don't think though that 'bed-blocking' involving elderly patients is currently a major issue (well, no more than it usually is) because we're not yet into Winter - by January, it undoubtedly will be.

First fall in carehome workers in a decade;

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/oct/11/englands-social-care-workforce-shrinks-for-first-time-in-10-years

Lost 50k workers in the past 12 months (on top of 100k+ shortfall previously)

Sure wages and working conditions aren't enticing many people into the profession, but this was an entirely predictable outcome of the mandate policy - more so considering that its never stopped transmission ?

https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/social-care/warning-many-care-workers-will-not-return-to-jobs-despite-vaccine-rule-change-02-03-2022/

17 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

You can't really compare Man City's 33 long passes per game to Crystal Palace's 25 and say Man City play more long balls.

I can ?

17 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The fairest way is looking at it as a proportion of their total passes.

TBF I'd entirely agree with this.

I'm not saying Man City use the long ball frequently, they obviously don't but the OPs question was 'is the long ball always bad' to which my answer would be absolutely not - the best teams hit more-or-less as many long balls as the lesser teams, they just compliment it with far more short passing. 

If you've got the players or the skill to play it long its an effective tactic and arguably, when done right, just as enjoyable to watch as tiki taka. 

4 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Not really. Not a statistical observation but they are all about short to medium length passing and creating overloads. Sure, every team goes long now and then, but City do not regularly play that way and have not for a fair while.

see above stats

23 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

No team in the top four divisions opts for a long pass less than Man City (6.8%). Derby rank 17th (12.9%), with 5 non-PL teams ranked above us.
Man City also have the greatest success at playing long balls (68.5%) than any other side (suggesting they are very good at choosing when to o long). Chelsea are 2nd with 54.3%. Derby are 60th (37.4%)

It depends whether you are judging Man City tendency to hoof it long or play it short. For sheer number of long balls they rank 15th in the PL this season and were 18th last season.  Over 1800 long balls last season suggests it not something they ever do.

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/total_long_balls?se=489

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/total_long_balls?se=418

I'm not saying they lump it forwards at every opportunity, of course they don't - but they do have the players to tap it around ad infinitum so their overall percentage is going to be lower than other teams.  Crucially however, all teams in the PL last season were within around 1000 long balls of each other, whereas Man City (1st) had 14k more overall passes than the teams with the fewest passes...

As you said, its about picking your time to play the long ball and having the skill to execute it.  

Man City regularly use a long ball, as do some other top teams.  I guess its all about when you do it and whether its aimless lumped into the corners ?

https://www.football365.com/news/liverpool-manchester-city-long-ball-football-john-nicholson

I've never watched American Football, can someone explain whats going on here...

17 minutes ago, sage said:

there are quiet fireworks, at the least they should ban noise only fireworks 

They should for private use, I don't mind if a proper display has noisy fireworks.

Loads of people have dogs - and the numbers shot up dramatically during lockdown, whilst I find fireworks mildly irritating one of my dogs gets quite upset and god knows whats going on outside in the chicken coop!

Yearly rant about the effect they have on my dogs, chickens, quails...

I'm not against organised displays, but letting them off in residential areas shouldn't be allowed to happen. 

Can't they invent quiet fireworks or are the pretty colours not the point ?

Ah ya miserable beggers ?

Its the best looking kit in a long time and better for having no ugly sponsor on the front.  Gonna go early on Saturday and grab mine ?

5 minutes ago, I Am Sheep said:

Is he sacked yet? 

They are thinking about it, but no one dares look him in the face to tell him ? 

Is it even a choice?

At my current time of voting it looks like I'm not the only one either!

Whilst it might be nice to tax the wealthy more we have remember that the top 1% of tax payers already account for more than 30% of all income tax collected.

 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/13/richest-britain-income-tax-revenues-institute-fiscal-studies

If we tax them too heavily they will just reside elsewhere where the top rates are lower and we'd get nothing and have no services.  If we don't tax them enough the Proles are out with their pitchforks. 

Who'd be a politician.

10 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Can we stop insulting Steve Cooper please. He is a very good manager who did amazing last season. Just because he manages our rivals is no reason to despise him. Can't remember him saying or doing anything anti-Derby, so let's just be slightly jealous that Forest appointed a manager that has done so well for them.

sorry

There is lots of good stuff on Twitter this morning, I could post dozens of these.  I should probably stop looking though and get some work done ?

I know its a bit later in the season than usual, we're well past August now but its good to see Notts Forest in their usual position...

Just posted this in the Mansfield thread but its mostly about Richie Barker and his relationship with Paul Warne tbh.

Nice bit of background re. the Paul Warne/Richie Barker relationship