BIllyD

18 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I just can't see how that makes it solely EU politics at play. The EMA says AZ is safe. A small yet significant number of EU countries go it alone and suspend use of it. Countries across the globe do similarly. 48 hours later they resume use. 

Unless the EU released fake data about the blood clots, a number of non-EU countries agreed that they wanted more investigation done. It's been done, safety confirmed (as the EMA said all along) and it's back in use. 

If the other countries hadn't suspended use, I could see why it could be described as solely EU politics. However as the EMA never suggested any safety issues, I'd still say it doesn't sound like EU politics, more member state politics. 

They have resumed though have they, Finland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway have still to resume. It's also not the first time either is it, It was banned in over 55s for what reason ? It's now been banned in the under 55s for what reason ?

You say fake data, but none has been released that shows anything that associated blood clots to the vaccine, even the EMA said this, so if ask you what data has been released that justifies the pausing of the programme ?

My own view is that authorities in certain geographies may be looking for someone to blame for a poor rollout. When one of your main members drop out of your programme and are doing so well in their vaccination programme, suddenly people start looking in your direction and these events against one one of the vaccines and not the other make me think that is more based on politics than "data".

12 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

How is that EU politics, unless it's not true data? 

You still ignored the question. 
 

They suspended it on blood clots, even though medical advice was to continue. As was proven, there was no connection between the two. The other vaccine which also had people that had blood clots after having the jabs was not suspended, so tell me why would you suspend one and not the other ?

It was not data that showed any connection between the two though. Same as there is no connection between blood clots and the under 55s. So I'm not quite sure what you mean by true data, if I have a car crash after having the jab, would you say the two are related ?

32 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I can't understand why my post attracted such controversy. If it's just EU politics, why have so many countries taken similarly cautious steps? 

I never said politics isn't part of it, it's fairly standard practice for all politicians. But some people here just blindly said EU is bad, booo. 

@Sith Happens was the first to laugh at my comment that it wasn't solely EU politics involved, otherwise it would be just EU countries suspending the AZ vaccine. So I tried to ask why. Still waiting for his reply with an answer.

Considering his aversion to politics on this thread he was quick to bring up the EU, which was a surprise. Not really. 

Several times I have answered the question about other countries, yet you seem to be ignoring it and just repeating the statement. I'll try again, they paused it based on the message coming from these EU countries. No other reason, unless you are saying it's something different ?

12 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Looks like the French are aiming to take the UKs European title of mismanaging the crisis. Probably have to look at it through the lens of their antivaccine population however... 

I think there's a bit of conflation between actions of the EU and its member states though. The EMA has always said the AZ vaccine is safe.

The EUs main screw up is their poor procurement of vaccines. They haven't had export bans like the USA. 

Let's be clear though, AZ aren't angels.. They've massively over promised what they can deliver to the UK and EU. Their test design was more confusing than Pfizer. 

Only criticism of UK gov on vaccinations is that I'd hoped they'd have invested more in ramping up production. 

They delivered over 660k yesterday and are ramping production up in line with what supplies they have. I'm not sure how they could have done much better in this area tbh ? 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/medicalxpress.com/news/2021-03-france-astrazeneca-jab-over-55s.amp
 

France now saying the AZ jab is only safe for those over 55, you can't make this stuff up.

No evidence to link these blood clots to the vaccine yet for some reason France continue to discredit it. Very clearly a political decision...what says you  @GboroRam ??

39 minutes ago, Sith Happens said:

 

They said today no delay, it's always been mid April for over 50s and on track to meet the target of mid July for all adults. 

 

Maybe a victim of our own success in delivering so many vaccines that we pushed ahead of schedule.

Seems to be a few countries that don't want the AZ vaccine, I'm sure we would be more than happy to take them off their hands ?

8 hours ago, RamNut said:

Q If I have the AZ jab, will I get better mobile phone reception?

No, but if you have a flat tyre when you goto drive home after it, the EU will probably list it as a side effect from the jab.

6 minutes ago, Rev said:

Hasn't that message been from individual countries in the EU, rather than from the EU itself?

Yes apologies, EU politics though as these are the major players that form the spine of the EU. 

Just now, GboroRam said:

No, as that's not what I was talking about. I said its not solely down to EU politics. Because it isn't. 

in what way isn't it ? These other countries you quote haven't had the same message given to them about the other vaccine, which is why they suspended their programmes, based on a message from the EU, that they have concerns around the AZ vaccine.

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Comome on Paul, justify that laugh emoji. Why have those Asian countries decided to play EU politics? 

Based upon the information given from the EU countries, of which for example Thailand have now decided to resume.

Now are you going to answer why these EU countries have suspended one vaccine and not the other even though the blood clots reported are roughly the same from both programmes?

2 minutes ago, Andicis said:

As shown tonight, our coaching staff have wasted Sibley's talents all season. 

Or Sibley has wasted his talents this season, far to easy to blame the management when your playing poorly. 

4 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Because Rooney has been playing him out of position and not giving him time on the pitch. 

He has not been given time all season. He hasn't done nothing, sweet FA apart from Birmingham, use the excuse of being played out of position but if you have the talent he has, he has to be doing more. Hopefully he will now kick on and continue to show what he can do.

1 minute ago, Andicis said:

He threw on attackers because we were 2-0 down and Sibley stepped up. It's pure coincidence. It makes it look like it was a managerial masterclass, when in reality, Rooney got lucky.

He did get lucky because we scored at the right time, but the difference in Sibleys performance was chalk and cheese to what he has been putting in recently. He was braver on the ball, he was back to his old self from last season.
 

Rooney never said he wasn't good enough, he just said he has to do more of what he was doing last season, be braver, do more on the ball, which is what he did. That isn't luck, that's just telling a player what he wants from him on the pitch.

4 minutes ago, Andicis said:

The credit goes to Sibley alone. It happened despite of Rooney, not because of him. 

Yes just a coincidence that WR tells him he has to do more, be more confident and take more chances and he does that.

Well done to Rooney for setting the challenge, well done to Sibley for responding to it.

1 minute ago, GboroRam said:

Ah, so you're suggesting that the EU made up the data? 

Don't think I have suggested anything of the sort have I ? 
 

Why has only the AZ been "paused" and yet the other vaccine has just as many blood clot cases ? Also who was it that said the AZ vaccine wasn't good enough for over 65s and how did that work out ?

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Before we blame EU politics for everything... 

Not sure I understand where you are coming from on that one. The countries highlighted have suspended on the back of information generated from the EU I believe ? Thailand for example have now decided to start uk again having received further information.

I originally thought that the decision taken was based upon medical information and possibly could see where they were coming from, the more I read and given the backing my major players to continue I am starting to believe this is a political call.

Seems maybe I'm not the only one....

The Polish Prime Minister's Chief of Staff briefing; accuses other countries of giving in to "disinformation":

“Most countries that have temporarily suspended (AstraZeneca) vaccinations have given in to panic caused by media-fuelled information about alleged complications”

“In my opinion, it is possible that we are dealing with a planned disinformation campaign and a brutal fight by medical companies, possibly supported by the countries in which these companies are registered”

He added: “I am convinced that many of them will soon return to vaccinations using AstraZeneca.”

Said that any decisions made by the Polish government would be “guided solely by hard data” and the recommendations of scientists and doctors.

8 minutes ago, Sith Happens said:

Germany, Italy and France have now suspended the AZ vaccine.

Macron on being told the news:

Seriously though it seems a total over reaction.

 

The issue is Norway had cases with blood clots, bleeding and low platelet counts. All together are rare I believe, blood clots are there own are lower than the reported figures and Pfizer has a higher return on them.

I suppose you have to follow protocol, if it turns out they are linked and you get more cases then you are in the poop.
 

Can these countries afford a delay though, if it comes back that they aren't linked that's more weeks wasted. Are the deaths going to higher from COVID if they pause the programme against those who get a blood clot ? 

A difficult one to call.

7 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

It's hard to say how much impact Rooney had on team matters when he was just a player-coach, but we're seeing the same sorts of team selections now as we did with Cocu in the first part of this season. Maybe just a coincidence ?

Maybe players who are the poorest performers get dropped, maybe depends on the formation they play, are you really saying that Rooney under Cocu was influencing the team selection ? 
 

You also mention last season being lower mine for academy players, given we sold Bogle and Lowe in the summer there is no surprise, how much lower is it  ?? 

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Byrne didn't play because he had a knock. 

Jozwiak has started all but 5 under Rooney (2 if those Rooney's first 2 games)

Waghorn's played badly for most of the season but has still had a 5 or 6 game run of starting - something Bird and Sibley haven't had.

If I remember correctly, Bird was the only player to get dropped after the 3-0 defeat to Rotherham. Bird and Sibley (and te Wierik and Marriott) the chosen players to deserve dropping after the early season 4-0 defeat to Blackburn. Sibley was arguably our best player in that game!

You mean the game after we lost 3-0 and he changed the shape to 4-4-2 and we subsequently won 2-1 against an in form Boro team....shocking decision.

Remind me on the Blackburn game, can you think of any reason why Rooney decided to drop them two ?

2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

No. I think we should play them because they're better than the alternatives.

Buchanan is already better than Forsyth in every aspect of play already.

Bird the only player we have that can play as a sole DM.

Sibley is one of the few players we have who can score from nothing. He's one of those players who instantly draws the opposition towards him, opening up space for others.

With the exception of Sibley he has been playing then. We have had two games every week, yesterday he dropped Wisdom for example, we are going through a bad patch, do we continue to play them even though they are performing ?
 

You make it sound as though he is picking on the academy players, yet it's not really the case is it, Byrne, dropped, Jozwiak, dropped, Waghorn dropped.

Sibley can create something out of nothing, Rooney said that, but if he isn't creating something out of nothing then he needs to add something else to his game, because that alone isn't good enough. 

6 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The problem is it's not just Sibley.

It was only a few weeks ago Rooney backed Buchanan to play for England one day. He's now found himself dropped from the first team.

Last year, Rooney was quoted as saying "Bird will be pushing for an England place in a year". Under Rooney, he's only retained a starting spot on 3 occasions.

You think he should play them just because they are from the academy then ?

18 minutes ago, Whoneedshuls said:

Yh good player on his day given a decent run miles better than some that are starting.. but wouldn’t surprise me if he wants out at the end of the season...

Yeah he could go to another team where he also wouldn't get into the first team based on his performances, then repeat.

Alternatively he could follow the footsteps of several promising youngsters like Sterling and Foden for example, who also struggled to get a regular starting place in the lineup. They listened to the advice (criticism in some eyes) given to them, took it on board and have become players who now consistently live up to their potential. Not doing it once every 10-15 games.

10 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

FTFY

To cryptic for me I'm afraid that is ?‍♂️

3 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

But there is definately an element of singling him out for special attention, there was zero need to bring up a lot of what he did.

I'd disagree on that, only my opinion of course, but he rounded on all the attacking players today. On Sibley he just stated that he needs to do more than he is, he has a point, the same as the rest of them have to.