CoronaVirus

This board is a temporary one for topics and posts to to with the Coronavirus pandemic. Please put all relevant material in here, rather than the other boards.

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby The Old TomCat » Mon May 18, 2020 7:05 pm

dursleydog wrote:Mask wearing mostly blocks the primary route of transmission (cough droplets), but most masks are only around 50% effective at this. Modelling studies (found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 2720300117) found that even with 80% takeup rate (so far in the UK from just my own observations here and from journalists in London, our takeup rate has been around 10% at best), they would reduce the infection rate and projected deaths by a not-inconsiderable 17-45%. Masks are an important helping push towards getting this virus under control, they simply aren't a solution in and of itself.

You must have been reading my mind: I was wondering what the % protection is gained by wearing a mask.
You claim it is around 50%. Therefore it follows that two people wearing a mask, one with CV19 and other without, the infection rate drops down to 25%, which would be point 25 on the R register. Well below the point 7-9 it currently is.

However you say the take up would be 80%, so therefore the government should make it mandatory that everybody in the community wear masks at all times in public. The British public has shown that they do obey sensible instructions and would comply.

In addition I suspect the infection rate would go down further if the government had a regular video broadcast on all TV channels on the correct way to wear masks. I see people on the TV wearing masks that just cover the mouth and are therefore at risk of giving or receiving this awful virus. They should be wearing it to cover both mouth and nose.

Plus add to video a handcraft section that shows best method to sew a mask. It would be impossible for the entire country to be issued with medical masks but a carefully sewn one would be 90+ as good.
User avatar
The Old TomCat
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:06 pm
Location: Stroud

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby dursleydog » Mon May 18, 2020 8:11 pm

The Old TomCat wrote:
dursleydog wrote:Mask wearing mostly blocks the primary route of transmission (cough droplets), but most masks are only around 50% effective at this. Modelling studies (found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 2720300117) found that even with 80% takeup rate (so far in the UK from just my own observations here and from journalists in London, our takeup rate has been around 10% at best), they would reduce the infection rate and projected deaths by a not-inconsiderable 17-45%. Masks are an important helping push towards getting this virus under control, they simply aren't a solution in and of itself.

You must have been reading my mind: I was wondering what the % protection is gained by wearing a mask.
You claim it is around 50%. Therefore it follows that two people wearing a mask, one with CV19 and other without, the infection rate drops down to 25%, which would be point 25 on the R register. Well below the point 7-9 it currently is.

However you say the take up would be 80%, so therefore the government should make it mandatory that everybody in the community wear masks at all times in public. The British public has shown that they do obey sensible instructions and would comply.

In addition I suspect the infection rate would go down further if the government had a regular video broadcast on all TV channels on the correct way to wear masks. I see people on the TV wearing masks that just cover the mouth and are therefore at risk of giving or receiving this awful virus. They should be wearing it to cover both mouth and nose.

Plus add to video a handcraft section that shows best method to sew a mask. It would be impossible for the entire country to be issued with medical masks but a carefully sewn one would be 90+ as good.


The numbers are quite rough figures. The 50% drop in transmission is only transmission of cough droplets, I couldn’t find estimates for a total decrease in transmission (a mask isn’t going to stop transmission via surfaces for example), and this study assumed an medical surgical mask, home made face coverings will be less effective but not really sure by how much. There’s also a lot of variation dependent on scenario, a mask might be quite effective at decreasing transmission when you’re brushing past someone at tesco, but it could be all but useless in a prolonged contact situation (ie. sat next to someone on a 3 hour flight.. like Mr O’Leary would like).

But given there’s no real downside to wearing masks or non-medical face coverings, I’m slightly confused as to why they weren’t encouraged by the government harder and earlier. Whether they reduce transmission by 5%, 15%, or 50% doesn’t really matter, they reduce it and they should be worn if possible in my opinion (and at least the government is advising it belatedly). I think it is worth stressing though facemasks are not in any way a replacement for social distancing measures, hand washing, lockdown or anything else. They’re a useful tool, not the whole toolbox.
User avatar
dursleydog
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Kernow

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby GreenMachine » Tue May 19, 2020 12:25 am

Plenty of the rona in Nailsworth it has to be said, stayed in doors this whole time as not to catch it although read somewhere last week that my phone can spread virus too ?

Gutted we didn’t have a chance for playoffs last season but priceless seeing Vince whine about it all as per usual, we’ll reach the autos next year, believe it peeps and stay safe!
Proud supporter of Forest Green. Love the team, hate the regime.
GreenMachine
Youth
Youth
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 3:17 pm

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby The Old TomCat » Tue May 19, 2020 7:46 am

For those Guardian readers on the forum I recommend they catch up on Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain.
He has really put the boot into the government Big Time.
Because of his interviewing style it seems government ministers are avoiding him. [He makes Andrew Neil look like a p#ssycat.]
But by avoiding him it allows Morgan free hits. Case of damned if they do and damned because they don't.
Last edited by The Old TomCat on Tue May 19, 2020 8:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
The Old TomCat
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:06 pm
Location: Stroud

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby The Old TomCat » Tue May 19, 2020 8:06 am

One statistic that came out from the Piers Morgan show this morning was that about 2/3rds of fatalities are those living in Care Homes [22,000+].
I've not heard that one before but if sadly true it is understandable.
At start of pandemic the NHS was at the point of being overwhelmed and it was essential all resources were diverted towards it. That meant Care Homes were second on list.
The NHS coped and latterly resources were then diverted towards Care Homes.
I suspect if the same choice were to occur in the future the public would vote NHS.
Yes mistakes were made which cost lives and officials will have to answer whenever an inquiry is convened, but nobody can dispute they did what they thought was best at time.
User avatar
The Old TomCat
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:06 pm
Location: Stroud

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby The Old TomCat » Tue May 19, 2020 8:32 am

Just had to amend earlier post.
I made reference to Andrew Neil with a normal everyday expression but the forum owners [probably American] assumed the word I used before cat was sexual!!!

On another forum, with American owners, I mentioned the town of Scunthorpe and that word was also blocked.

This year English people wanting to celebrate St Georges Day were deemed racists by Facebook because they proudly posted the red cross of St George.

Big brother is watching.
User avatar
The Old TomCat
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:06 pm
Location: Stroud

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby stanman » Wed May 20, 2020 4:38 am

There was a fascinating BBC2 Horizon programme last night on Coronavirus. It was the second of a series of 2 on this topic in fact.
I found it -
a) interesting
b) had lots of new information and ideas (to me anyway)
c) certainly disconcerting at times - perhaps even depressing
d) raised possibly terrifying implications for the long term.

If you want to know more about covid-19 it is a must watch.
There is no 'I' in team
User avatar
stanman
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 3068
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: Minchinhampton

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby TreeinWillsbridge » Wed May 20, 2020 10:58 am

Even if a vaccine is produced it may well not work for everybody, I had the flu jab regularly until last year and caught the flu every year every January. Until two years ago when I had the jab late in November and caught flu again in February.

What is more likely to happen is that an effective treatment will be developed, given time to study the virus, that will make it less of a killer than it is now.
TreeinWillsbridge
Reserves
Reserves
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 8:51 pm

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby dursleydog » Fri May 22, 2020 12:26 pm

Some quite worrying news emerging today surrounding our testing capacity and contact tracing setup ahead of the return to schools on June 1st, and the lockdown easing that has already occurred.

Those following the Department of Health and Social Care's daily statistics will have noticed a sharp spike in the number of tests over the last few days, reaching 170,000 a couple of days ago, as the government strive to reach the latest target of 200,000 tests a day by the end of the month. With the number of active cases still circulating around our population (latest ONS antibody study suggests we're still seeing 60,000 new cases a week, a number that is only coming down very very slowly), we need a truly massive testing capacity in order to EFFECTIVELY (key point, it doesn't matter if we've got it unless it actually works on a scale required to make a difference) contact trace, test, and isolate cases. 200,000 a day would probably be enough for this, and I welcome this aim from the government. However, there is a massive hole in their testing statistics.

Looking more closely beyond the headline figure of 170,000 tests, there's a bit of a mystery. The number of people tested isn't climbing. When we we're managing 80,000 tests a day, we were testing around 60,000 a day. This ratio is about in line with what we'd expect, some people will need a repeat of the test if there's a problem or an unclear result or lost test, you never reach 100% of your capacity, but we were consistently reaching around 70% of it up until late April. However, when we did 170,000 tests in a day, what was the the number of people tested? 60,744. It's not climbing. So what's going on?

Firstly, we saw a spike in the number of tests at the end of April just in time to hit the 100,000 target set by Matt Hancock. However, the definition of the number of tests completed was dropped, changing to just "Number of Tests". The reason for this being was that this new figure included testing kits that were posted out either to homes or testing centres but hadn't been used yet, and indeed may never be. Source for this information is here from the Health Service Journal. https://www.hsj.co.uk/quality-and-perfo ... 44.article

The danger of this of course is that logistical issues with actually getting the tests completed and having a meaningful impact on the ground are completely missed in the figures, and that any criticism of the government is immediately rebutted with the headline figure that has no basis in reality. But of course that was the entire point, to hit a target and get the media off their back, rather than actively fix the problem.

But that was at the end of April, why do I raise this now? Well like I said, we have a new target of 200,000 tests/day, and we need every one of those tests for contact tracing to be effective and to help prevent a 2nd wave as we begin to open up. The number of tests has continued to rise towards 200,000, but the number of people tested has remained stuck at 60,000. Then yesterday it emerged why, the government had changed the measure again.

For a coronavirus test, a swab has to be taken from the back of the throat and from the nose, and these swabs are sent off to the lab. Up until a few days ago, everybody from South Korea to the USA counted that as 1 test. We're not. We've started counting each individual swab as a separate test, essentially double counting the tests and adding 10's of thousands to the figure without improving the situation on the ground whatsoever. This doesn't help people who need access to a test, because the tests aren't there. This doesn't help the researchers and modellers in SAGE, because it throws out all the data on testing. This doesn't help any of us, because it means the government can act as if the capacity for an effective contact tracing setup is there when it quite clearly isn't. The only people this helps is the government themselves, to throw a big number out and deflect criticism. It erodes public trust in the government, it erodes scientific trust in the government. My partner is heading back to work June 1st and putting herself in harm's way for the sake of caring for the children at her nursery and not only is the contact tracing setup not going to be effective enough to help protect her in the event of a localised outbreak, but the government are pretending it is by fabricating the figures, making it all the more unlikely the issue will actually be resolved. We're still only actually managing around 80,000 a day, testing around 60,000 people. Everything that has happened since is just manipulation of the statistics beyond any semblance of reality.

And before I'm accused of being a Guardian reader again, as if that nullifies anything I'm saying anyway, here's the article in the Telegraph on it. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-heal ... officials/
User avatar
dursleydog
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Kernow

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby stanman » Fri May 22, 2020 3:27 pm

stanman wrote:https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20067835v1

Forgive me to posting a link to a medical article, but this paper may provide a clue to making a major step forward in the return towards normal life.
A salivary point-of-care covid-19 antigen test with results in minutes that could be a passport to resumption of mass gatherings - like FGR home games!
I've referred to this briefly before.
A cheap such test could be launched very soon - it's been developed by a UK company - Avacta - and is now being finalised together with a major US company who is able to provide world-wide distribution.

It is to be hoped that this simple procedure passes the final regulatory hurdles including the necessary performance criteria. I wish it well.
You heard it here first, folks!


So who posted that then?!

Dursleydog- This seems to me to be a simple solution to all the apparent chaos to which you refer.

This test that I was on about a month ago is now in the final stages of development. It is a point-of-care test and is a slide test (like a pregnancy test) but uses saliva - not urine as a pregnancy test does. These is as much virus in saliva as in the nasal and throat linings in those who have it - whether pre- or a-symptomatic or showing symptoms of covid-19 infection.
The performance criteria are looking excellent and Avacta hope to get CE appoval next month meaning it could be available in Europe, to be followed by the FDA in the US.
In anticipation of that, they have appointed world-wide distribution agents a couple of days ago - via a firm set up by the founders of Boohoo, would you believe! I guess they certainly know about the logistics of distribution!!

Of course, yesterday the Govt said the NHS were about to trial another POC test produced by a privately owned small U.K. company called Optigene. This works on a different principal and does require a special machine to read the results whereas the slide test requires no other equipment and no expertise to use it.

As I said a month ago this quick simple-to-use slide test could be used to allow entry to mass gatherings (well moderate numbers anyway) and once inside a stadium for example 'social distancing' could certainly be less restrictive than would otherwise be the case as you would know that everyone admitted was vrus-free at that time.
It could be used in numerous situations as well like care homes, schools, entertainment venues, workplaces, flight and cruise boarding etc. etc. It's simplicity could be a massive help in developing coiuntries too.

Perhaps I should email our Stadium Manager Dane, and encourage him to take an interest!
There is no 'I' in team
User avatar
stanman
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 3068
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:26 pm
Location: Minchinhampton

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby dursleydog » Fri May 22, 2020 4:27 pm

stanman wrote:
stanman wrote:https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20067835v1

Forgive me to posting a link to a medical article, but this paper may provide a clue to making a major step forward in the return towards normal life.
A salivary point-of-care covid-19 antigen test with results in minutes that could be a passport to resumption of mass gatherings - like FGR home games!
I've referred to this briefly before.
A cheap such test could be launched very soon - it's been developed by a UK company - Avacta - and is now being finalised together with a major US company who is able to provide world-wide distribution.

It is to be hoped that this simple procedure passes the final regulatory hurdles including the necessary performance criteria. I wish it well.
You heard it here first, folks!


So who posted that then?!

Dursleydog- This seems to me to be a simple solution to all the apparent chaos to which you refer.

This test that I was on about a month ago is now in the final stages of development. It is a point-of-care test and is a slide test (like a pregnancy test) but uses saliva - not urine as a pregnancy test does. These is as much virus in saliva as in the nasal and throat linings in those who have it - whether pre- or a-symptomatic or showing symptoms of covid-19 infection.
The performance criteria are looking excellent and Avacta hope to get CE appoval next month meaning it could be available in Europe, to be followed by the FDA in the US.
In anticipation of that, they have appointed world-wide distribution agents a couple of days ago - via a firm set up by the founders of Boohoo, would you believe! I guess they certainly know about the logistics of distribution!!

Of course, yesterday the Govt said the NHS were about to trial another POC test produced by a privately owned small U.K. company called Optigene. This works on a different principal and does require a special machine to read the results whereas the slide test requires no other equipment and no expertise to use it.

As I said a month ago this quick simple-to-use slide test could be used to allow entry to mass gatherings (well moderate numbers anyway) and once inside a stadium for example 'social distancing' could certainly be less restrictive than would otherwise be the case as you would know that everyone admitted was vrus-free at that time.
It could be used in numerous situations as well like care homes, schools, entertainment venues, workplaces, flight and cruise boarding etc. etc. It's simplicity could be a massive help in developing coiuntries too.

Perhaps I should email our Stadium Manager Dane, and encourage him to take an interest!


These easy to use saliva tests with quick results could massively help, but we need some larger scale trials to determine the accuracy of these tests. A quick test with a 30% false negative rate would be pretty useless, you’d be sending thousands back into work with the virus. I think I saw we’re trialling one of these with 5,000 key workers, which should be a large enough sample size to get a good handle on how accurate this test is. Given the problems there have been with people waiting 7-10 days in some cases for test results, these kind of tests will be very useful for rapid home testing to aid contact tracing.
User avatar
dursleydog
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Kernow

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby dursleydog » Mon May 25, 2020 6:24 am

I don’t think I could comment on the hypocrisy and contempt that run through the heart of the Cummings story without swearing, so instead I’ll just leave this quote from one of the scientific advisors, which has been publicly agreed with by many others of the same committee.

“As one of those involved in SPI-B, the Government advisory group on behavioural science, I can say that in a few short minutes tonight, Boris Johnson has trashed all the advice we have given on how to build trust and secure adherence to the measures necessary to control COVID-19.
Be open and honest, we said. Trashed.
Respect the public, we said. Trashed
Ensure equity, so everyone is treated the same, we said. Trashed.
Be consistent we said. Trashed.
Make clear 'we are all in it together'. Trashed.
It is very hard to provide scientific advice to a government which doesn't want to listen to science. I hope, however, that the public will read our papers (publicly available at gov.uk/government/gro…) and continue to make up for this bad government with their own good sense.“
User avatar
dursleydog
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Kernow

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby man_of_kent » Mon May 25, 2020 5:32 pm

Had to stop watching the interview with Cummings mid way through the questions.....

To me, it stood out in his statement that only one thing may have justified his families change of location. That was the potential credible threat to his families safety at his London address. Not clear if this was actually significant and could not be readily dealt with. Up until the point I watched, no media talked about this at all!!!!!! …..surely this was the only point in Cummings statement which potential could justify a change in location (not necessarily to Durham). Did I miss something in the following interviews questions!!!!!???!!!!
man_of_kent
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby michael » Mon May 25, 2020 6:16 pm

if your eyesight 'feels weird' is it the most sensible thing to do to 'put it to the test' by driving and potentially putting other road users at risk ? someone asks Mr Cummings .

Mr Cummings replies 'no it was not a risk whatsoever ,because the rest of the population were on lockdown and not driving, so i was not putting any other roaduser at risk-there weren't any other roadusers .
michael
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 8049
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:27 pm

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby dursleydog » Mon May 25, 2020 7:21 pm

man_of_kent wrote:Had to stop watching the interview with Cummings mid way through the questions.....

To me, it stood out in his statement that only one thing may have justified his families change of location. That was the potential credible threat to his families safety at his London address. Not clear if this was actually significant and could not be readily dealt with. Up until the point I watched, no media talked about this at all!!!!!! …..surely this was the only point in Cummings statement which potential could justify a change in location (not necessarily to Durham). Did I miss something in the following interviews questions!!!!!???!!!!



The only verification we could get for that is from the Met Police in all honesty, he surely would've contacted them at some point to enquire about safety arrangements if he thought there was a risk. There's certainly been a media scrum and angry locals around his house the last few days (unsurprisingly) but in March? Not convinced unless the police confirm otherwise, and like you say his entire reasoning is based upon it. Otherwise they should've stayed self-isolating in the house and if things got bad enough that there was a risk to his kid the support should've come to them.

Even so, he completely admitted to the lockdown breach of driving to this local beauty spot, a 60 mile round trip, in all aspects except admitting it was a breach even though it clearly was. For someone who was so concerned about their child's safety about 30 seconds prior, the act of figuring out if your eyesight and general health is good enough to drive by chucking your whole family in the back and winging it is frankly an insane defence, it's insulting. Never mind the fact that date also happened to be his wife's birthday, funny he didn't mention that...

On top of that, I believe he stated that he returned to work after his wife started showing symptoms before they made the trip up. That's a clear breach of household self-isolation rules on it's own.

Few other points:

- Cummings said his child ended up in hospital in Durham and that he nearly did as well. Obviously a difficult thing for the family to deal with, but infected people moving from an area of the country with lots of cases to an area with very low cases (as it was at the time) and filling up the regional hospitals is EXACTLY why the advice told people to stay at home. If everyone acted in a similar fashion, hospitals would've been overrun.

-He said he had no symptoms at the time of driving up to Durham, and his wife only had mild symptoms that they weren't sure was covid. In that case, why go to Durham in such haste? And how on earth do the "exceptional circumstances" apply? He had no idea he was going to get badly ill, and indeed his wife never got badly ill enough for them to require childcare help. That loophole he exploited was designed for safeguarding risks, exceptional situations where the child is at risk of abuse an/or serious harm, not sure how on earth that applies to this case and certainly how it applied at the time they made that decision. His child was definitively not categorised as "vulnerable" by the advice.

- He was very very keen to attack the media at every opportunity, accusing them of being misleading without actually refuting anything. All very Trump-like. He basically admitted to every offence bar one, the return trip up on March 19th, which frankly can't be proven either way anyway. In addition, the most misleading piece of media surrounding the incident was written by his own wife in the Spectator at the time, who recounted their personal experiences of the disease in great detail, yet completely neglected to mention their trip to Durham, or indeed their child's trip to the hospital,

- He confirmed Johnson knew the week Cumming's returned to work. So why did Johnson claim to have not gone through the details until yesterday? Appreciate Johnson was recovering from coronavirus at the time, but no excuse for the past few weeks.

The investigation Durham Police are beginning into the matter may be quite illuminating. It's sad and insulting that it's run this far, how on earth the government think one advisor's career is worth bulldozing the entire public health message for I'll never know. We're about to head into a phase of the lockdown where test, trace, and isolation will be completely vital to controlling this virus, if people feel that isolation includes driving 260 miles to visit family, 30 miles for a day trip, walks in the wood ect ect the contact tracing simply will not work, end of story.

We just have to hope the british people are better than the donkeys that lead us.

EDIT: In one of Cumming's wife's Spectator articles she confirms that she in fact can drive. Given by their own account she was far less ill than he was, why would it be necessary for him to risk the entire family's safety testing if he was well enough to drive again when she could've simply driven instead? Looks increasingly like that Barnard Castle day trip was exactly that, a completely unnecessary 60 mile day trip for his wife's birthday. Then back home and have a socially distanced chat with the grandparents, all while countless families across the country actually followed the advice and missed out on births, deaths, and funerals. Its disgusting.
Last edited by dursleydog on Mon May 25, 2020 9:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
dursleydog
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Kernow

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby NewForestRover » Mon May 25, 2020 7:33 pm

Boris doesn't want to lose Dominic.

End of story.
Always Looking On The Bright Side
User avatar
NewForestRover
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 6:22 pm
Location: The train to Stroud as often as possible!

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby man_of_kent » Mon May 25, 2020 7:45 pm

Spot on Dursley Dog.

What a bloody mess.
man_of_kent
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby Too occasional fan » Mon May 25, 2020 8:25 pm

NewForestRover wrote:Boris doesn't want to lose Dominic.

End of story.



Actually, it is worse than that. He cannot operate at this level without Dominic.
The gimlet of the forum.
User avatar
Too occasional fan
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 3190
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:04 pm

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby The Old TomCat » Tue May 26, 2020 8:55 am

Reference the Dominic Cummins interview:
It's not often one gets to observe a group of so hostile reporters as he endured for over an hour.
They kept repeating same set of prepared questions that he had already answered in his opening statement.
It is understandable some people turned off half way through the briefing.

It reminded me a little of the Andrew Neil pre-GE19 hard hitting interviews with the party leaders.
His interview with Corbyn may well have scuppered Corbyn's chance of the Premiership.
At least Andrew Neil had a brain that can absorb what he has been told and move on, unlike those 2nd rate reporters in the Rose Garden.
We learnt nothing more than what DC read out at 5pm.

I've hardly heard from Andrew N since start of pandemic.
I'm not a big fan of his forensic style of interview but at this time of world wide chaos he is sorely missed.
So does anyone know why he is keeping a low profile?
User avatar
The Old TomCat
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:06 pm
Location: Stroud

Re: CoronaVirus

Postby dursleydog » Tue May 26, 2020 9:10 am

The Old TomCat wrote:Reference the Dominic Cummins interview:
It's not often one gets to observe a group of so hostile reporters as he endured for over an hour.
They kept repeating same set of prepared questions that he had already answered in his opening statement.
It is understandable some people turned off half way through the briefing.

It reminded me a little of the Andrew Neil pre-GE19 hard hitting interviews with the party leaders.
His interview with Corbyn may well have scuppered Corbyn's chance of the Premiership.
At least Andrew Neil had a brain that can absorb what he has been told and move on, unlike those 2nd rate reporters in the Rose Garden.
We learnt nothing more than what DC read out at 5pm.

I've hardly heard from Andrew N since start of pandemic.
I'm not a big fan of his forensic style of interview but at this time of world wide chaos he is sorely missed.
So does anyone know why he is keeping a low profile?


. Some of the questions were on the poor and meandering side (Peston can’t seem to stop his mouth moving), but many were good. And the lack of clarity in Mr Cummings’ statement didn’t lead to the short sharp questioning I think a lot of us would’ve liked to have seen.

As for Andrew Neil, while he can be a forceful interviewer, he’s let his business interests and personal political affiliations get in the way of performing an impartial public service for the BBC. As chairman of the Spectator, he employs Cumming’s wife who repeatedly lied throughout her article in his paper, I imagine that’s a source of embarrassment to him.

A 1 on 1 interview to pick apart Cummings’ statement would eviscerate the man and the whole government with him, be it by someone like Neil or Emily Matlis, who conducted the now infamous interview with Prince Andrew.
User avatar
dursleydog
Top Manager
Top Manager
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Kernow

PreviousNext

Return to Coronavirus

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

About FGR

We’re a club that looks to the future, but our identity is forged from a rich 128-year history. Founded in 1889, we’re one of the oldest football clubs in the world.

In 2017, we were promoted to the Football League for the first time in our history – which means we can spread our sustainability message to an even bigger audience. FIFA recently described us as the greenest football club in the world. That’s quite an accolade, and it shows how we’ve been able to bring together football and environmental consciousness at the highest levels of the game.