Coronavirus: Sarries know best!

[mol2]

I doubt he would be tested until and unless he showed symptoms. The guidance for his travel pattern is that there is no need to self isolate. The fact that he is a rugby player makes no difference.
Testing is only being done on those with suspicious symptoms and those who have been in contact with cases.

Those who are not required to self screen are not being screened (I doubt there is the capacity to screen those from those areas) and as yet it is unclear how long after exposure someone becomes positive on the test.

People and organisations acting off their own bat and doing other than the guidance from the WHO which informs national strategy is both illogical and adds to panic. Guidance changes as the understanding of the prevelance and transmission becomes better understood but the club cannot be criticised for doing as they are told by experts guidance.

[Grimlish]

What’s so special about travelling through Hong Kong Airport BFG? There are 103 cases in HK which had a population of 7.4 million in 2017. Sure, it’s an airport so people from other potentially affected areas travel through but that’s true of all airports. Has everyone who’s travelled through an airport been banned from England's ‘environment’? My guess is the statement by Borthwick was a tacit acknowledgement that they (RFU) had over-reacted (the statement made no sense) and needed to provide some other ‘justification’ for their actions which may we’ll have had other rugby-related reasons eg fitness and scrummaging.

They will be risks but risks will vary from one situation to another - there being ‘a’ risk is meaningless unless it is quantified in some way. That risk is clearly astonishingly low.

[fleabane]

teds, I’m with you!

[BFG]

What’s so special about travelling through Hong Kong Airport BFG? There are 103 cases in HK which had a population of 7.4 million in 2017. Sure, it’s an airport so people from other potentially affected areas travel through but that’s true of all airports. Has everyone who’s travelled through an airport been banned from England's ‘environment’? My guess is the statement by Borthwick was a tacit acknowledgement that they (RFU) had over-reacted (the statement made no sense) and needed to provide some other ‘justification’ for their actions which may we’ll have had other rugby-related reasons eg fitness and scrummaging.

They will be risks but risks will vary from one situation to another - there being ‘a’ risk is meaningless unless it is quantified in some way. That risk is clearly astonishingly low.

You answered your own question.

[Grimlish]

BFG I did so in a way which shows the absurdity of the RFU position.

[BFG]

BFG I did so in a way which shows the absurdity of the RFU position.

Playing it safe might not be so absurd to those more vulnerable to this virus.

Trying to read between the lines it seems to me that England aren't in desperate need of another experienced loose head enough to take even the smallest risk here.
If Carre wasn't picked for Wales would Sarries do the same as England?
Is it a case of the needs outweighing the perceived risks at this stage?
If so the Italians might disagree!

[Noggs]

It seems to me that the key piece of information, which none of us have, is whether Mako has been tested and cleared.

Being symptom free doesn't mean that a person is not a carrier, it's also possible that someone is contagious but not showing any symptoms yet. If Mako has not been tested, there is a risk, guidelines or not, if he has been tested and found clear, then no problem.

I may be wrong (my wife tells me that I am wrong most of the time) but I am not sure just how soon the current 'tests' are able to pick up whether or not you are infected. I believe Leicester University are developing a face mask which contains strips which identify very small levels of virus, the aim being to Identify those who have contracted the virus but who may show negative using current test methods. If this is the case then the 'better safe than sorry' approach would seem sensible for the reasons I posted earlier.

[WhitecapTiger]

Sarries are following the Government advice.

It's England that are not.

The Govt advice is a baseline.

Go below or ignore the advice = risk / recklessness. Possible consequences (legal? Moral? Medical?) if the risk is realised (becomes an issue in future).

Follow advice = Govt to blame if all goes banzai. Sarries approach, nothing wrong with it.

Place additional controls on top of advice = caution and common sense...considering said future consequences. England's approach, absolutely nothing wrong with it.

[Grimlish]

Place additional controls on top of advice = caution and common sense...considering said future consequences. England's approach, absolutely nothing wrong with it.

For me that should read as follows

Place additional controls on top of advice = totally unnecessary and pandering to those who are panic-mongering.

Its being done for other reasons - the conspiracy theorist in me says its deliberate misinformation to encourage folk to sit up and take notice, or entirely a decision about fitness to play. What it is not is a decision based on the evidence and publicly available expert advice.

[h's dad]

Teds, Mako is working within the current guidelines. England have chosen to exercise the caution of not having him in the camp.
If this was Joe Bloggs returning to the UK then I would expect the same decision, no need to self isolate.
We can agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Tigerbeat, I presume the guidelines you are talking about are these.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/

They clearly say that you should self-isolate if you are advised to by the online thing OR advised by a medical professional.

Please forgive me for using an uppercase OR and bold but it seems to me you seems you have missed this.
its pretty clear that Rugby England have taken a judgement which presumably is based on a risk assessment by a medical professional that Mako should not be present in their work environment. This would suggest, given the limited information we each have, that Mako has been advised to self isolate on the advice of a medical professional.

Please also pay attention to the fact that these guidelines are outlined for the general public and are not aimed at men who spend hours a day with their faces rubbing against each other in scrummaging practice.

If you don’t want to continue the conversation that’s fine. I have had the opportunity to try to point out the flaws in your arguments and others can judge for themselves whether I have succeeded.

Happy to discuss further here, offline, in person over a pint or coffee or whatever.

Just to point out that you are making assumptions based on limited information. I would suggest that it is likely that if a medical professional had given specific advice to Mako to self isolate, he would have done so. That's an assumption, no more no less than yours (well, probably less of an assumption than yours), and I would not claim that it proves flaws in anybodys' arguments.

[RichieB]

The original poster implied criticism of Sarries - surely entirely understandable given the lack of trust and belief that they now inspire in many (including me). Whether or not they have done anything wrong, like many I'd venture, I have no idea as I'm not an expert. Reading some of the posts on here, I'd recommend listening to Jurgen Klopp's recent reply to a reporter asking him about the Corona Virus.

[h's dad]

The original poster implied criticism of Sarries - surely entirely understandable given the lack of trust and belief that they now inspire in many (including me). Whether or not they have done anything wrong, like many I'd venture, I have no idea as I'm not an expert. Reading some of the posts on here, I'd recommend listening to Jurgen Klopp's recent reply to a reporter asking him about the Corona Virus.

Entirely agree, mitigated by this being an irrelevant talking shop and you could make exactly the same point about many of the rugby conversations on here (puts on tin helmet (again)).

[BFG]

The original poster implied criticism of Sarries - surely entirely understandable given the lack of trust and belief that they now inspire in many (including me). Whether or not they have done anything wrong, like many I'd venture, I have no idea as I'm not an expert. Reading some of the posts on here, I'd recommend listening to Jurgen Klopp's recent reply to a reporter asking him about the Corona Virus.

Entirely agree, mitigated by this being an irrelevant talking shop and you could make exactly the same point about many of the rugby conversations on here (puts on tin helmet (again)).

To be fair to the conversations on here they often do make more sense than my local clubhouse, where most of the talkers knowledge of the English language doesn't extend much past calling the ref out whilst being half cut.

[Tiglon]

Even Public Health England have now come out and said Vunipola's exclusion by England was unnecessary.

It's fine for the RFU to be cautious, but they should have done a better job of trying not to add to the hysteria and panic sweeping our media, which could become more of a problem than the disease itself.

Well done Saracens for taking a sensible approach.

[drc_007]

Based on current data from here https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps ... 7b48e9ecf6

HK 107 cases 51 recovered 2 deaths, number of new cases declining

UK 164 cases, 8 recovered 2 deaths, number of new cases accelerating

A brief visit to HK airport for a flight transfer looks the least of the concerns.