Author Topic: GAA Response to Coronavirus  (Read 58167 times)

imtommygunn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10303
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #630 on: May 14, 2020, 12:28:28 PM »
It's also about protecting the healthcare system from being overloaded. Some would argue that is the chief concern.

five points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1105
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #631 on: May 14, 2020, 12:33:20 PM »
It's also about protecting the healthcare system from being overloaded. Some would argue that is the chief concern.

That was the basis upon which it was mooted and implemented in the first place.

Cluborcountywhynotboth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #632 on: May 14, 2020, 12:33:32 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

smort

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 211
  • O.A.S.I.S.
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #633 on: May 14, 2020, 01:06:39 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

I live with someone vulnerable, I couldn't go back to football then. And we have boys who work as carers. And one of our backroom team has an elderly parent who lives with him. That's just off the top of my head, could be more. Soon down a good few numbers.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2020, 01:09:32 PM by smort »

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #634 on: May 14, 2020, 01:07:16 PM »
There's an argument that under 40s should be let play away (and work away for that matter). The number of deaths in this age group from Covid is tiny and almost all with an underlying condition. So as much chance of dying from a sudden heart attack as Covid-19.

Obviously there'd need to be common sense, nobody with even a cold should be playing or attending games. People who have asthma or who are obese should stay away too, but I think a coherent case could be made to allow the healthy U40s try and get back to normal. (I'm over 40 by the way so should be kept under current lockdown measures for a little while longer!)

Totally missing the point. the less than 40 year old can get infected, can take up a hospital bed, can put strain on our hospital and front line workers, can infect their work colleagues, can spread disease to the vulnerable and yet as you say only a tiny amount of them will die.

Very very few healthy under 40s need hospitalisation when they catch Covid-19.

There'll always be risk. And if going out to do groceries and take exercise is acceptable risk to society, then letting healthy under 40s play ball is increasing that risk by a tiny amount compared to the benefits it will have.

Hound - do you really think the risk is increased by a tiny amount?

Say all precautions were taken - no changing rooms/huddle/team talk etc - you are right that it would be a tiny risk.

But comparing playing in the middle of a game with doing groceries/taking exercise is absolutely ludicrous

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16274
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #635 on: May 14, 2020, 01:34:21 PM »
Where does Cluborcounty propose to dump the elderly, sick, disabled etc?
Presumably only elderly sick or disabled carers, medics etc will be allowed look after them?
And I expect no visits from family etc.

Sounds a bit like Germany from 1933....
1 BIG CUP and 1 Cupeen so far....

Ed Ricketts

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #636 on: May 14, 2020, 01:46:40 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.

Not one single person is saying that.

Of course no one is saying that. It's utterly disgusting. But whether they realise it or not, that's where these suggestions lead.

What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

This is great and all, but it just won't work in the real world. The 'shielding' strategy will never be airtight enough that you can afford to have a huge proportion of the population running around unchecked. The best way to keep death tolls down is to keep infections down across the entire population. Unless you don't really care about death tolls, because it's mostly just old and fat people dying and they don't matter.

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #637 on: May 14, 2020, 01:48:26 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

So if a young, healthy footballer lives with anyone old, vulnerable etc either they dont play and also isolate or they are shit out of luck and have to find a new home for the forseeable future in order to play ball?

five points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1105
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #638 on: May 14, 2020, 01:49:35 PM »
This is great and all, but it just won't work in the real world. The 'shielding' strategy will never be airtight enough that you can afford to have a huge proportion of the population running around unchecked. The best way to keep death tolls down is to keep infections down across the entire population. Unless you don't really care about death tolls, because it's mostly just old and fat people dying and they don't matter.

If this was true, entire countries would shut down annually for the duration of the flu season.

five points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1105
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #639 on: May 14, 2020, 01:51:05 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

So if a young, healthy footballer lives with anyone old, vulnerable etc either they dont play and also isolate or they are shit out of luck and have to find a new home for the forseeable future in order to play ball?

as opposed to being shit out of luck and unable to play ball because competitions have semi-permanently ceased?

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #640 on: May 14, 2020, 02:05:49 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

So if a young, healthy footballer lives with anyone old, vulnerable etc either they dont play and also isolate or they are shit out of luck and have to find a new home for the forseeable future in order to play ball?

as opposed to being shit out of luck and unable to play ball because competitions have semi-permanently ceased?

And who will pay for this new house? The GAA?

The GAA is built on the community aspect but are we going to say f**k the elderly and vulnerable now?

trueblue1234

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1571
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #641 on: May 14, 2020, 02:11:38 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

So if a young, healthy footballer lives with anyone old, vulnerable etc either they dont play and also isolate or they are shit out of luck and have to find a new home for the forseeable future in order to play ball?

as opposed to being shit out of luck and unable to play ball because competitions have semi-permanently ceased?

And who will pay for this new house? The GAA?

The GAA is built on the community aspect but are we going to say f**k the elderly and vulnerable now?
If it's a choice between football or not having contact with your parents for the foreseeable I think the GAA will take a big hit.
Grammar: the difference between knowing your shit

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #642 on: May 14, 2020, 02:14:59 PM »
The lockdown has never been about protecting young, healthy people from the virus. Where has that idea come from? Why are people arguing against this straw man?

It's about stopping young, healthy people (and everyone else) being a conduit for virus to not so young and not so healthy people.

Inherent in the argument that young, healthy people don't die, and should therefore be allowed to play away, is the notion that old and sick people should die so that this can happen. That's reprehensible.
[/b]

Not one single person is saying that. What people are saying is that we have very defined sections of the community that are at a much much higher risk from this awful disease, yet at the moment we are in total lockdown for everyone (barring essential workers etc...). There will come a time, be it for work, football whatever, where this will no longer be possible/acceptable. IMO the best way forward would be to shield/lockdown/cocoon whatever you want to call it, those who are vulnerable and let everyone else get on with it. So your young healthy footballer or worker or whatever will not be passing it on to someone vulnerable as they will still be isolating.

So if a young, healthy footballer lives with anyone old, vulnerable etc either they dont play and also isolate or they are shit out of luck and have to find a new home for the forseeable future in order to play ball?

as opposed to being shit out of luck and unable to play ball because competitions have semi-permanently ceased?

And who will pay for this new house? The GAA?

The GAA is built on the community aspect but are we going to say f**k the elderly and vulnerable now?
If it's a choice between football or not having contact with your parents for the foreseeable I think the GAA will take a big hit.

But it seems some people are willing to take that hit & play on which seems madness

five points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1105
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #643 on: May 14, 2020, 02:16:47 PM »

as opposed to being shit out of luck and unable to play ball because competitions have semi-permanently ceased?

And who will pay for this new house? The GAA?

The GAA is built on the community aspect but are we going to say f**k the elderly and vulnerable now?

It is never a matter of saying f**k the elderly and vulnerable.

If there are neither games nor gatherings in the medium term, there is no GAA and not much community either.

While the GAA is indeed built on the community, the reverse tends to apply too.

Ed Ricketts

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« Reply #644 on: May 14, 2020, 02:17:29 PM »
This is great and all, but it just won't work in the real world. The 'shielding' strategy will never be airtight enough that you can afford to have a huge proportion of the population running around unchecked. The best way to keep death tolls down is to keep infections down across the entire population. Unless you don't really care about death tolls, because it's mostly just old and fat people dying and they don't matter.

If this was true, entire countries would shut down annually for the duration of the flu season.

Except that COVID-19 is much more infectious and has a much greater mortality rate than seasonal flu. This info has been available for weeks, keep up.

Oh, and there's a vaccine for the flu!