Other Round 22 Fixtures

[jgriffin]

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanr ... 7/fulltext
Chance of false positives 4% or less, especially given context.

[Tiglon]

It would seem a feat of staggering numerical dexterity to be able to find a 23 man matchday squad who just happen to have had no contact with the 16 positive-tested players; or good luck.

Agreed. I understand that when Sale announced that they intended to fulfil the fixture on Wednesday they were intending to bring back some former players (e.g. Tuitupou) which Prem Rugby has now said will not be allowed.

Seems unlikely the game will go ahead, unless Sale put out an U18 team and get absolutely slaughtered.

[TigerFeetSteve]

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanr ... 7/fulltext
Chance of false positives 4% or less, especially given context.

Ok so that means if it's right the odds of all 16 being wrong are 1 in 2x10^22 (2 with 22 zeroes added)

To put that in to context you're 10,000 times more likely to win the euromillions twice in a row (only buying one ticket each time) than all 16 of these being false positives

[Tiglon]

I believe the false positive rate of 0.8% - 4% (estimated) is of all tests, not of positive tests. It's not 4% of positives that are false, it's 4% of all tests that are false positives. I.e. if you carry out 100 tests, 0.8 - 4 of them will come back with false positives.

It could be that there was contamination of the Sale testing kits. This has happened previously in the US.

[Grimlish]

“so that means if it's right the odds of all 16 being wrong are 1 in 2x10^22 (2 with 22 zeroes added)”

At risk of turning this into a debate about mathematics, doesn’t that depend on the testing methodology? If it’s done in batches, the odds reduce substantially...

[Scuttle]

It would seem a feat of staggering numerical dexterity to be able to find a 23 man matchday squad who just happen to have had no contact with the 16 positive-tested players; or good luck.

What position do we think Steve Diamond is going to be playing?

I would say wing it forward or front crower

[lwade1986]

It would seem a feat of staggering numerical dexterity to be able to find a 23 man matchday squad who just happen to have had no contact with the 16 positive-tested players; or good luck.

What position do we think Steve Diamond is going to be playing?

Right Whinger.

[Scuttle]

It would seem a feat of staggering numerical dexterity to be able to find a 23 man matchday squad who just happen to have had no contact with the 16 positive-tested players; or good luck.

What position do we think Steve Diamond is going to be playing?

Right Whinger.

[mol2]

“so that means if it's right the odds of all 16 being wrong are 1 in 2x10^22 (2 with 22 zeroes added)”

At risk of turning this into a debate about mathematics, doesn’t that depend on the testing methodology? If it’s done in batches, the odds reduce substantially...

Not quite. If these false positives relate to a faulty batch then the calculations relating to average false positive rates don’t apply.

However I would guess Sale will have done retests just in case.

[WhitecapTiger]

“so that means if it's right the odds of all 16 being wrong are 1 in 2x10^22 (2 with 22 zeroes added)”

At risk of turning this into a debate about mathematics, doesn’t that depend on the testing methodology? If it’s done in batches, the odds reduce substantially...

Not quite. If these false positives relate to a faulty batch then the calculations relating to average false positive rates don’t apply.

However I would guess Sale will have done retests just in case.

Sale are welcome to conduct their own retests of course but, surely in this kind of situation any re-tests should be completely independent?

[TigerFeetSteve]

“so that means if it's right the odds of all 16 being wrong are 1 in 2x10^22 (2 with 22 zeroes added)”

At risk of turning this into a debate about mathematics, doesn’t that depend on the testing methodology? If it’s done in batches, the odds reduce substantially...

Not quite. If these false positives relate to a faulty batch then the calculations relating to average false positive rates don’t apply.

However I would guess Sale will have done retests just in case.

Sale are welcome to conduct their own retests of course but, surely in this kind of situation any re-tests should be completely independent?

I think all tests are organized by an independant company contrracted Premiership Rugby.

[WhitecapTiger]

Not quite. If these false positives relate to a faulty batch then the calculations relating to average false positive rates don’t apply.

However I would guess Sale will have done retests just in case.

Sale are welcome to conduct their own retests of course but, surely in this kind of situation any re-tests should be completely independent?

I think all tests are organized by an independant company contrracted Premiership Rugby.

[Scott1]

I’m sure I just saw Gloc 20-0 Saints on the BBC red button,that haven’t kicked off yet have they?!

[WhitecapTiger]

I’m sure I just saw Gloc 20-0 Saints on the BBC red button,that haven’t kicked off yet have they?!

Are you taking the proverbial?

Match forfeited by Saints, Glaws get 5 point win.

[Scott1]

Cheers,wasn’t aware. Was out all day yesterday