Jump to content
Melbourne Football


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


NewConvert last won the day on May 3

NewConvert had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

897 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

1,569 profile views
  1. Not impressed by Chianese. Has some good games but otherwise quite average. Prefer dagastino.
  2. There is an unfounded optimism that Windbichler is fit and likely to remain fit. Sadly, all evidence points to the contrary.
  3. Good grief man! That is crazy talk!!!
  4. Atkinson comes to mind and prior to that was Curtis Good and Connor Chapman. It does happen but when you look at some of the other young players that have come and gone like Melling not much has happened. Conversely the only player that I thought that came through the system and is still doing something is Craig Goodwin.
  5. Exodus of young players will always happen. For example, Wales is not A-League level and could easily be blocking a promising younger player. So if we say let's keep him you are pushing out someone else like Najar. For me only Atkinson is worth keeping. For the other three we are not the club to develop them further. And my perception is that Naijarine and Najar will be journeyman for a while (just like Wales) and then have a career in the NPL. Where the criticism is valid is regarding the more senior players such as Jamieson, Berenguer and Noone. Getting the balance right between letting these three depart and promoting youth to their spot is where the art of list management comes in.
  6. Even though I agree with your gist, I am still convinced that blanket simple rules are what people understand. And as JW has pointed out, some don't even understand them.
  7. A more relevant example is Singapore that seemed to have had the public health issues under control and all of a sudden COVID-19 made a huge comeback. Even here in Victoria with the meatwork's employees testing positive. They haven't told the public whether COVID-19 can survive in meat (frozen?) or who sells their products. I think that some restrictions can be relaxed with certain provisos. Certainly no pubs/cafes/restaurant/pokies. And it may be easier to lift the restrictions by shire/council rather than blanket.
  8. how are we going to cope with a short off season?????
  9. I shop at the markets and IGA but it is difficult to keep and maintain the 1.5m. What I find really annoying are people who stare at shelves, pondering, thinking just grab the effing thing and get a move on. Or those who can't walk on a straight line whilst texting.
  10. Going back to your original post three things have happened in the last week: Q&A (a show I don't watch but do read the recaps) had an economist who argued teh same thing that you did; it emerged that a group of prominent economists, including Ian Harper and Warwick McKibbin who are about as right wing as you can get, signed a letter not to lift the lockdown too early as the longer term costs would outweigh the short term gain; and Sweden is doing just as you suggested for the same reasons. So far the number of deaths in Sweden puts them in the top 10. It is interesting that the Swedish professor accuses the rest of the world of being unscientific when in reality all responses are based on assumptions. Speaking to my Swedish cousins, they are saying that most of their friends are voluntarily following the rest of the world with self imposed lockdowns and the fear is real. My tip is that in five years time both sides will claim they were right.
  11. The most salient point is "hard to quantify that x did y". No one is denying that life expectancy is not related to a societies well being as long as the distribution of wealth is reasonable. Two examples: every book I have read state that in ancient Rome when Augustus became emperor the life expectancy at birth was 21 but if they survive past puberty life expectancy jumped to either 40 or 60 depending on your source. The second example is Haiti, one of the poorest countries on earth - if you are part of the 1% in Haitian society your life expectancy is 1st world, if you are not then your life expectancy is just above 40. So 2000 years apart and not much difference between those two societies. Life expectancy can be attributable to a rather large number of things. And economic well being can also be attributed to a rather large number of things. That is why reading economic history and history in general is rather important. Oh and as my GP pointed out, life expectancy keeps on increasing because infant mortality rate keeps on dropping (although he and I have had a rather genial discussion on this). You are right that the poor keeps on copping it but that would have been the case. I note that as soon as the middle classes became unemployed the Prime Minister thought that Newstart had to be immediately doubled otherwise people may soon realise that Newstart ain't much chop. And for someone who lived through the Malcolm Fraser/John Howard mass unemployment period in the late 1970s and then through Keating's recession that we had to have, people are more resilient than what you give them credit for. And no I don't go for the bullshit of wellness - I am of the keep the stiff upper lip type of bloke. Actually, Australia is a rather good place to be in. As the Economist pointed out in 2011 after Chile had been hit by the then largest earthquake/tsunami combination in 2010 topped by Japan's earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011 and Haiti's earthquake in 2011, once a country gets to certain levels of wealth, they recover faster. Chile lost 19% of GDP in less than 30 minutes, Japan lost industry and 28 thousand people, yet by 2015, no one would have known that they had had such tremendous seismic activity. Yet over in Haiti with an earthquake of 7 they lost 200k people and they still haven't rebuilt. Australia has enormous wealth, an educated population and sufficient space to overcome the current travails. Whether we have teh political class capable of delivering is what I have doubts on. As for you taking offence, I suggest that you read your original post and you will see why some on this forum raised an eyebrow at your statement. I would almost agree with you but then marketing kicks in. Keep it simple stupid did not appear out of thing air, it came out of observation of teh general public behaviour. And of course there is the old chestnut - no one ever went poor by underestimating the stupidity of the general public. On a more general note what the PM should have stated that Australia is a modern, complex successful society because we allow people the freedom to learn, work and play as best suits them with only general rules to follow. As such it is impossible to list all the possible activities that people engage in and to the limits that these can be conducted during the lockdown period. Follow the principles outlined in the policies and then you will be fine. The police should be more discreet and leniency shown in certain cases. There is a major difference being in car having driving lessons with the person you live with as opposed to having a birthday party for an eight year old.
  12. Glad you weren't voting during WWII - we shall fight them on the beaches, we shall fight them in the fields or until our budget forecast becomes too dire.
  13. He didn't get off on the first trial - deadlocked jury which led to the second trial.
  14. Well there are over 25M people in Australia (give or take with inbound/outbound tourism and the like) so if we were to test 25M we need to ask two questions: do we have 25M kits and over what period of time? I have no symptoms, been doing all that is recommended and the last person that I have contacted with who travelled overseas did so at the end of January (Florida of all places). So should I go to the front of the queue, middle or at the rear? Then comes the thornier question do you test once or do you test on a regular basis. Just because t=someone has been tested all that means is that the person did not have the virus when they took the swab. The person on their way home could come in contact with the virus and then get it. As for which country is doing the most testing well its certainly not the USA as they started much later and without the resources. Which is why Trump has blockaded a Canada bound ship with medical resources. I suspect that per head of population Singapore, Japan and South Korea are in front. For those who study history they would know that when the Europeans arrived in the America's and Australia they brought a raft of diseases that the indigenous population had no immunity to. And the first ones to die off were the elderly and the sick, then came the rest of the population. Similar story is unfolding now. Also whilst I am at it, the idea of comparing COVID-19 with general influenza was premature. Influenza follows the season, specifically winter. COVID-19 does not care for the weather. it is hitting every region of the planet at the same time. So COVID-19 is immune to the environment. Now a few weeks ago both the British and Dutch governments were contemplating isolating only those who were at greatest risk. There was a humanitarian outcry and so they backed down. I thought it was a good strategy. However unfolding events have shown that would not have worked and it would have cause even greater damage. In Australia it is not as big a humanitarian disaster as in Spain, Italy or China. But it still has the potential to be so. This is the concern. We don't know enough about the virus (short, medium or long term) to be able to make predictions. Japan has instigated Level 2.5 restrictions to the Tokyo area (plus six other prefectures) because they had an unexpected spike in people contracting the disease. When you look at their stats you got to wonder why but they are being very cautious. And given that the Japanese are accustomed to living with danger (earthquakes, tsunamis, typhoons) and they are worried, then I am terrified. I don't think any government will get things right - did they act too late or will they lift the restrictions too early. We can never know because there are no parallels to compare with. We just got to roll with it.
  15. First up I don't think anyone on this forum was in the jury. So both the defence and prosecution presented their cases and the first jury was hung and the second jury convicted. Having read the High Court Statement it is a crock of shit. The first paragraph stated that the jury behaved irrationally and that the jury ought to have entertained doubt. How the fuck would they have known that the jury did not entertain that Pell was innocent? The jury sat out for days considering the evidence in front of them and somehow the HC stated that the jury did not consider this? Their words were that any rational person would have said "innocent" so the inference is that the jury was irrational. Who are they to cast a slur on members of the jury? So are we now meant to bow to self proclaimed omniscient members of the HC? What the HC has done is attempt to subvert and destroy teh jury system. I have known four individuals who have had to serve on jury duty. Three of those would run rings around most of the population and somehow in this court case they ended up with morons?
  • Create New...