Jump to content

RandomAccessMemory

Member
  • Content Count

    195
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RandomAccessMemory

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. ....in which case, there is no immunity. https://www.plymouthhospitals.nhs.uk/covid-19-advice-for-staff Aren't they suggesting the opposite because of the bit in bold? There's also this from the same page I guess they can't be certain whilst the disease is in its infancy as there's still so much to learn about it, but they also say it's very unlikely it would be a new infection. I think the first point might be saying it you weren't tested the first time then it's likely it wasn't actually Covid-19?
  2. Might be a silly question but wouldn't the number of people able to be infected change everything? So IF theres immunity for any length of time then the people that have already had it within that time can't get it again wouldn't that limit the possible spread?
  3. I'm with you on this. I've seen the same tweets, I've also seen the same person mention about 17/20 EPL clubs having suspended season ticket sales, which means that 3/20 haven't, and they are the clubs with all of the TV money! There are other comments in reply to the club's tweet, I've seen at least one bemoaning the club for 'asking us to renew', but that's not even what the tweet says. In fact I'm sure the reason for the club's tweet today is that this was the original date for renewal before seats were freed up for others to purchase, and the club wanted to make sure as many people as possible were aware that the date had been extended so they knew they didn't have to renew by the end of today, as I imagine a lot leave it to the last minute.
  4. I'm almost certain that the article didn't originally specify below the Championship. I read it early on and at the time it read as being the entire EFL, I think that's also why there are still Leeds and WBA photos in the article.
  5. Something I've been wondering for a while, up until quite recently weren't they only testing hospitalised people? Were they then only testing people that were there with suspected Covid-19 symptoms? I'd have thought so as tests were very scarce and it surely wouldn't have been a wise use of them on people who weren't symptomatic. If so, how did only around a third of the total people tested come back positive? What was wrong with the other two thirds of people that meant they were ill enough to be in hospital with suspected Covid-19 that didn't come back positive? This makes me wonder if these numbers would then also translate to the community deaths that are being announced weekly by ONS? For example if all suspected cases are being recorded/reported as such would that number not be likely overstated as not all suspected cases that were referred to hospital for testing came back positive, so the chance of all other suspected cases being positive is unlikely? Not that it would be any less tragic, of course.
  6. I know the accounts are for the year ending June 2019, so I don't know if it's possible as the club weren't notified until after that date, but is there any chance it could be something to do with the amortisation charge from the EFL? If they use the allowed delay and beat the EFL charge within that time then they carry on using the same method, and if not they change it?
  7. I'm not sure what it says about me that I'm able to recognise them by their legs! 🤣
  8. My other guess for 2 is Bielik, I was deliberating for ages between him and Davies originally!
  9. 3. Nugent? Thanks @RamNut for doing this, it's good to have something else to focus on for a bit.
  10. 2. Davies? 5. Keogh? 7. Wilson? 9. Martin?
  11. Good point, also any clubs that are supposed to be getting new pitches/pitch refreshes, or work done on the stadium, etc.
  12. There is no way that is the most fair way to do it, as harsh as it sounds those clubs have not yet achieved those things, until something is a mathematical certainty all they have achieved so far is being in the position they are currently in, not titles, not European football, not promotions, not surviving relegations. Unless there is something in the terms that the clubs signed up to that says positions can be considered final before the natural finish of the season then they'd be leaving themselves open to legal action from all angles. Thinking about it logically, if you do that you'd be likely to receive legal action from all clubs that could mathematically (however unlikely): Premier League - Win the title Get into the Champions League Get into the Europa League Stay up (particularly Villa who have played one game less) Championship, League One, League Two - Get automatically promoted Are in the (now non existent) play-off positions Get into the (now non existent) play-off positions Stay up If you void the season and start afresh you won't receive the legal action from the clubs that could stay up as they effectively will have done, so you cut down a large amount of potential legal action straight away.
  13. Yep, it's a horrible situation for many clubs. Obviously this is a very serious disease and it's just awful to think that it is going to cause so many deaths, however the vast majority will survive and like any other business if clubs go under then that's a lot of jobs lost and a lot of people that will be struggling financially. When you think of the vast amounts of money at the top level, it's very difficult to see lower clubs struggling just to survive. Thinking about our situation, if the EFL charge had any bearing on our investment deal being delayed then Mel's been doubly affected as he's now going to have to continue to fund it all himself for the foreseeable, as I'd have thought it's unlikely to go through for some time now.
  14. I'm not sure that you could do that as not every team has played every team twice this season, in some leagues clubs haven't even played the same amount of games as each other. This also opens a can of worms because teams could argue that they've had a more difficult set of games played than their rivals and that affects their current points total. You may be able to squeeze the extra games from this season within the next season and use BOTH seasons as next seasons total, so teams do get an advantage from their current position, but still have to play the extra games at some point, so you've effectively got two seasons in one. However this has it's pitfalls too as some teams will have played another when they had one set of players yet others will have to play them with their new set of players, so it still leaves one of them feeling frustrated that they've had a more difficult game than the other depending on who signs/sells who in the meantime. This also means more games added to an already long season without the additional break, and at this point we have no idea whether the next season is even able to start on time. Also hope you feel better soon @Nishfan
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.