G STAR RAM

11 hours ago, nottingram said:

Surely it is worth it if it saves even one?

Whether it would or not, I don’t know. But seems a small price to pay for any chance at saving even one life, to me anyway.

To be clear I mean the individual decision to wear a mask. I understand pub table service provides significant challenges to the hospitality sector that perhaps need to be considered from an economic POV

On this basis will you be wearing a mask and social distancing for the rest of your life?

9 minutes ago, sage said:

Personally I don't think 73,000 dying a year is an acceptable price to pay for not having to wear masks on trains and having to have table service in pubs, but each to their own.  

Will wearing masks on trains and pub table service save them 73000 lives then? Hasnt seemed to over the last 16 months.

1 hour ago, Turnstile said:

Creditors very often HMRC put businesses into receivership it doesn’t have to be the owner.

Not when they have agreed deferment or time to pay agreements.

9 minutes ago, Turnstile said:

I would say they would be very astute,buying the same assets and not having to pay the creditors out at full value.millions saved if you only have to pay cocu and Keogh  and other creditors 10% in the pound.

What assets do you think they will be buying if he club is put into liquidation?

I think if they are waiting for MM to put the club into liquidation they will be waiting a very long time...

1 hour ago, Turnstile said:

I can’t agree with you about Morris being committed to Derby’s wellbeing.He has not even been paying all the running costs,hench we now owe HMRC money.Surely the larger the debt the less attractive an investment we become! A really astute business man /buyer would be waiting for us to go into liquidation to pick us up on the cheap with a lot less debt.

The purchase price would already reflect any debt to HMRC, so paying it off would not make it any more or less attractive.

If a buyer thinks MM would let the club go into liquidation then I would doubt that they are very astute.

38 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

And did you think that would be an immediate return to normal, covid complete as such? 

For me? Damn right I did.

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

Not really that much to understand was there?

Once the top 10 levels of people, set out by the JCVI had been vaccinated then we could start to get back to normal.

 

30 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

Pretty sure that was the government claiming to understand something they really didn’t have an understanding of at the time. It was always a 10 level game even if it was advertised otherwise.

Not really that much to understand was there?

Once the top 10 levels of people, set out by the JVCI had been vaccinated then we could start to get back to normal.

5 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

Because the vaccine is great at reducing the dangers of COVID, it isn’t a 100% cure. Unfortunately we need a mixture of vaccines and prior infections to get through this, we aren’t yet at the correct mixture, hence rising cases and hospitalisation. 
 

Maybe compare it to a computer game with 10 levels, perhaps we are at level 7 or 8. 

Does this computer game advertise that it only has 7 levels to complete the game, only for levels 8,9 and 10 to be sprung on you after completing level 7?

33 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

It’s a 100% fact that vaccines do not contain microchips or have any effect on 5G. 
 

Many of the teenagers want the vaccine, we aren’t pushing it on them, give them the choice.

 

Any suggestions on how those unable to receive the vaccine are able to adapt to become comfortable? 

Was you involved in the manufacture of the vaccine? If not, dont know how you can state anything 100%. I agree with you but its only my belief not something that I can state as a 100% fact.

I'm sure there are some teenagers that want it and they are free to make their own choice I guess but we certainly should not be pushing it at that age group in my opinion.

The vulnerable group can continue to wear masks and continue to socially distance as they have done for the previous 16 months. 

3 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

The vaccine uptake has been great, but it’s still not at the point which enables us to maintain a standard of life that most would call normal. We still haven’t offered it to the 12 + category, many of whom wish to receive the vaccine. We still have a much lower uptake within certain parts of the population.

I’m talking about the absolutely outrageous claims the anti vaccine brigade have been making on platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. Graphene, 5G, microchips, mind control, more people die from the vaccine than COVID etc, claims we absolutely 100% know to be false. Some of these claims are packaged to seem very believable.  

Personally think it is very irresponsible trying to push the vaccines on to the 12+ category.

We are definitely at a stage where we can get back to living a normal life. The vulnerable have been offered the vaccine and if they do not want it then that is them choosing how to use their personal responsibility. 

Those unable to have it are unlikely  to ever be able to have it and need to find a way to adapt that makes them feel comfortable.

As much as I agree with what you say, anyone claiming to be 100% on Covid facts is not telling the truth at this point.

6 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

Because we disagree on many things doesn’t mean there is no balance. 

The problem with covid is that the disruption it causes even when, as you put it, a minuscule amount of people are hospitalised, dying or very ill. That minuscule amount of people actually adds up to a very large and sometimes incomprehensible number of people. Not to mention the effect it has on those around them.

We really need to deal with covid as I don’t believe we are yet at the stage that we can learn to live with it. 

I really don’t have anything massively positive to say about Covid. It’s bad, very very bad. 
 

I agree that using spin or not being honest can cause lots of damage. Some of the false information on vaccines for example has held us back enormously. 
 

In what way? The vaccine uptake is phenomenal.

What you call false information many would call genuine concerns.

To pretend to know everything about the vaccine is giving out false information, any long term side effects (if there are any) will not be known for years to come. 

Just to clarify here, I have had both vaccines as I thought it was the right thing to do but I'm under no illusions that it is a calculated risk on my part and anyone that tries to tell me otherwise is lying.

21 minutes ago, Pearl Ram said:

Missed a trick there Jimmy, I would have got a lot of pleasure out of pointing out to someone as pedantic as that, it should have been an athlete. ?

Wasnt really pedantic, the story was there to try and sensationalise the fact that a 31 year old footballer has gone into hospital after contracting Covid.

At least I assume that was the intention as I have not seen links to stories of 31 year old athletes who have contracted Covid and had no ill effects.

2 hours ago, jimmyp said:

No. Try google perhaps. 
 

Sad though isn’t it when 31 year old professional athletes are being hospitalised by Covid. I hope he gets better soon. 

Athletes or a athlete?

16 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Where they booing?

No but not joining in must mean they disagree with it, which is surely what the booing is also demonstrating?

1 hour ago, 1of4 said:

Why is taking the knee more divisive than standing has a group at the pitch side?  Are not both actions a protest against racism? 

Anyone that boos ethier of these two actions, must mean they disagree with the reason why these actions are taking place. As the reason for these actions is to raise awareness of and the stopping of the endemic racism in our society. So anyone booing these actions must be condoning acts of racism.

By your logic, any player not taking the knee must disagree with the reason why these actions are taking place.

Do you therefore think players such as Lyle Taylor and Wilfried Zaha condone acts of racism?

32 minutes ago, Jubbs said:

Soooo why else were they boo'ing taking the knee? 

Pretty sure (not to be confused with Priti Patel) that the reasons have already been discussed to death.

11 minutes ago, nottingram said:

Of course they have the right to do it. I don’t think booing the knee in and of itself means they are racist but I think it is pretty clear that some who do boo, are doing so because they are racist. Priti Patel obviously does not need to condemn this but she had the chance to and instead condemned the knee as “gesture politics.”

The question then is whether not condemning it, and therefore not condemning the racist element of that, leads to a situation where the racists in our society feel empowered to abuse the England players, which is the very reason they are kneeling. Tyrone Mings clearly feels this is the case. 

Personally, I feel Priti Patel did not need to condemn the boos but perhaps could have used the opportunity to plead with those who do so to please listen to the players as to why they are doing it. She instead said it was gesture politics and “stoked” the situation, as Mings says. The players were then racially abused. Did she directly cause that? No, clearly not. Could she have taken steps to help reduce or prevent it? Yes, I think she could.

I imagine she has faced racism in her life, and that is a disgrace. In an ideal world, it would have been good for that to allow her to empathise with why England players feel taking the knee is important to them. 

Fair comments. 

2 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Thing is, there is either a clear message that racism in any form is unacceptable or there isn't.

Mixed messages from those in power are simply not good enough. That's what Mings is pointing out

Every time someone looks for an excuse, or a loophole, or a weasel interpretation of why they think it's not actually pro-racist to boo an anti-racist gesture - THAT right there is the problem.

If you don't see that right now is the time for solidarity and a clear message then you can't be surprised when racism happens

But there was no mixed message.

Priti Patel said if people want to boo players taking the knee that they have the right to do that.

Now when racism has actually ocurred she has correctly called it out.

Not sure what the mixed message here is?

15 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Do all people of colour see things the same then? Is that what you're saying, they're all the same?

???

What a very strange way of interpreting what I actually said. 

1 minute ago, therealhantsram said:

For me, there are certain things, common values that bind us together as a nation. Those things include honesty, integrity, tolerence, respect and a sense of fair play.

As I see it, Mings is standing up for those values - the essence of Englishness - and calling out those who don't. 

He's a rich young man who doesn't need to do that. He could keep quiet, go home to his mansion and live a luxury life.  But instead he's using his current celebrity for the benefit of us all, knowing he'll get a tirade of abuse for doing that - online, and at every football match he plays from now on.

Today he's standing up my values and for every English person who shares those values too.

And that's what makes me feel proud.

Fair enough, good response. 

Do you think its respectful, telling a woman that probably spent most of her childhood blighted by racism that she is only pretending to be offended by racism?

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

I mean if what the secret barrister said was correct then I would fully back up Mings.

Where is the evidence that the people who booed taking the knee are all racists? ANSWER - THERE IS NONE 

Where did the Prime Minister and Home Secretary publicly criticise the players for taking the knee and back the racists? ANSWER - THEY DIDN'T. 

Other than that Im sure it was a brilliant article.

Its a shame after such a brilliant tournament which united 99.99% of the country behind the team and brought a feelgood factor to the country, that some people just cant wait to sweep it under the carpet and get back to concentrating on the 0.001% of people that behave like morons, and Im not just talking about the racism issue.

53 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

But "that is how free speech works" - so you should be supporting him! Because you support free speech.

Must be so confusing to be you right now

 

I support his right to free speech, I don't agree with what he is saying, not that confusing is it?

6 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

But like Patel, did you also support those who chose to boo the England players taking the knee?

What Mings says is simply the truth. She refused to condemn those who booed an anti-racist gesture and now expects no one to raise an eyebrow when she condemns the racism?

I don't ever really support anybody booing anything, I think its a bit of a moronic think for an adult to do.

I agreed with her that she supported for people to be able to boo it if that is what they wanted to do, that is how free speech works.

I think what Mings has said is pretty tasteless.

I imagine a 40 something Asian person has suffered a lot more racism than a 20 something black person.

No problem with Mings using hos platform for calling out the mindless idiots from Sunday night, but using it for attacking somone who was actually calling out the racism seems kind of counter productive to me.

7 minutes ago, angieram said:

Maybe you're the one who needs to concentrate and read properly! ?

Oops!