Jump to content

Coaches are upset about Covid forfeit rule


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, theguru said:

We disagree, no one is stopping COVID, we have to live with it.  And at this point it appears vaccinated people are the ones spreading it and not unvaccinated people with natural immunity.  Masks don't work, even N95s from a recent study, so there is nothing any adult is going to do to stop anything.

On your scenario, I don't think it is realistic but to answer you forfeit. 

If the unvaccinated have natural immunity then why are they filling up hospitals at an obscene rate?   
 

There’s ways forfeits can be avoided.  It’s up to the players to make a choice if they want to risk forfeits or nots.  I think we’ll see a common theme amongst teams that don’t have any forfeits this year.   

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tigerpride94 said:

The way I understand it, is if unvaccinated, you have to quarantine if in contact with covid positive person. If vaccinated then don't have to quarantine unless have symptoms. Some teams don't have enough kids vaccinated so makes their numbers drop to not be able field a team due to quarantine.

 If that is the rule, I'm fine with the team having to forfeit.

 In addition, I don't think a team has any room for complaint if they have to forfeit. They own it just like they own everything else about their program.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

Don't do that here, please. 

Do what?

In a COVID context there are basically three types of people, people that have never had COVID.  Those people can't spread around what they don't have.  That only leaves vaccinated people and people with natural immunity to COVID due to an infection (or some combination of the two).   Those two groups of people have to be the ones spreading it. The question is which of those groups are more likely to spread COVID?  To answer that question, and I don't want to get in over my head, is the vaccine targets spike proteins only but your body’s immune system develops antibodies to the entire surface of the virus.  Although that is not definitive (there are recent studies but I don't want to get into it all) I think common sense is on the side of antibodies to the entire surface of the virus vs. only spike proteins.  With all that said, I am sure both groups can and do spread COVID but as we have discussed in another thread the vaccine is not only not a panacea but natural immunity may in fact be a better defense on many fronts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, theguru said:

Do what?

In a COVID context there are basically three types of people, people that have never had COVID.  Those people can't spread around what they don't have.  That only leaves vaccinated people and people with natural immunity to COVID due to an infection (or some combination of the two).   Those two groups of people have to be the ones spreading it. The question is which of those groups are more likely to spread COVID?  To answer that question, and I don't want to get in over my head, is the vaccine targets spike proteins only but your body’s immune system develops antibodies to the entire surface of the virus.  Although that is not definitive (there are recent studies but I don't want to get into it all) I think common sense is on the side of antibodies to the entire surface of the virus vs. only spike proteins.  With all that said, I am sure both groups can and do spread COVID but as we have discussed in another thread the vaccine is not only not a panacea but natural immunity may in fact be a better defense on many fronts.

If people who are vaccinated are spreading the virus, who was spreading the virus prior to vaccines?

If "natural immunity" is better, why are hospitals full of unvaccinated people?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, barrel said:

I don’t think it’s a big deal as far as win/loss. I think alternative options presented here are pretty good solutions. The part I don’t agree with and is in bad taste is the forfeit fee. It appears if your team gets Covid and has to cancel you take the L and have to write a check. That is rough. 

Does the KHSAA get any portion of the forfeit fee, or is that paid exclusively to the opponent?

If the forfeit fee just goes to the opponent, I mean, I get it...it's a forfeit fee that was written into a contract, and even if you had a justifiable reason for forfeiting or not, it is part of a contract, and you're contractually obligated to pay it. On the flip side of that, though, if I'm a coach or AD, so long it's a local game that gets cancelled and I'm not out any out-of-pocket costs for travel plans, etc...I'm gonna go ahead and tell the quarantined team that just cancelled with me, "Keep your money, I'm just glad it's not my team."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, FB Head said:

How will RPI compute these games/forfeits? 

Good question. Last year's Covid cancellations were effectively treated as tie games. Since there is no margin of victory component to RPI, I suspect a Covid forfeit will simply count as a win for one team and a loss for the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, PurplePride92 said:

If the unvaccinated have natural immunity then why are they filling up hospitals at an obscene rate?   

 

2 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

If people who are vaccinated are spreading the virus, who was spreading the virus prior to vaccines?

If "natural immunity" is better, why are hospitals full of unvaccinated people?

I think you both are conflating natural immunity after recovering from COVID with people that have never had COVID.  The people that have never had COVID are the ones filling up the hospitals.

This is from a very recent study in Israel:  

In Israel, more than 7,700 new cases of the virus have been detected during the most recent wave starting in May, but just 72 of the confirmed cases were reported in people who were known to have been infected previously – that is, less than 1% of the new cases. Roughly 40% of new cases – or more than 3,000 patients – involved people who had been infected despite being vaccinated. By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theguru said:

 

I think you both are conflating natural immunity after recovering from COVID with people that have never had COVID.  The people that have never had COVID are the ones filling up the hospitals.

This is from a very recent study in Israel:  

In Israel, more than 7,700 new cases of the virus have been detected during the most recent wave starting in May, but just 72 of the confirmed cases were reported in people who were known to have been infected previously – that is, less than 1% of the new cases. Roughly 40% of new cases – or more than 3,000 patients – involved people who had been infected despite being vaccinated. By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.

Why are you quoting a study from Israel? 

I've said this before, the vaccines were never intended to keep you from getting infected. 

You're saying vaccinated people are spreading the virus. That's not true, but let's pretend it is... Who was spreading the virus prior to the vaccines coming online?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

Why are you quoting a study from Israel? 

I've said this before, the vaccines were never intended to keep you from getting infected. 

You're saying vaccinated people are spreading the virus. That's not true, but let's pretend it is... Who was spreading the virus prior to the vaccines coming online?

I am quoting the Israel study because it is some of the best science we have on the vaccine vs. natural immunity.  I would go further to say Israel is probably the gold standard here, it certainly isn't America. 

To bring it closer to home I can quote the Cleveland Clinic:

This study followed 52,238 employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System in Ohio. 

For previously-infected people, the cumulative incidence of re-infection “remained almost zero.” According to the study, "Not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a [Covid-19] infection over the duration of the study” and vaccination did not reduce the risk. “Individuals who have had [Covid-19] infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination,” concludes the study scientists.

To your last point, I concede to you my quick response was not complete.  Certainly when someone that is unvaccinated or doesn't have natural immunity gets infected with COVID they can and do spread it to others.

Coming full circle, my "medical advice" to everyone is if you have not been vaccinated and you do not have natural immunity you should strongly consider getting the vaccine, especially if you are older or have other health conditions that make you vulnerable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, WestKYHoops4 said:

I say implement waivers, and play on as normal if you are healthy, the biggest issue we have right now is contract tracing, that needs to be completely scrapped. 

Contact tracing is a complete joke that only provides piecemeal data that is often beyond its shelf life.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.