News Liam Jones retires from AFL

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
So if Jones gets the Vax - he won't catch Covid?

Or he won't spread Covid?

How is he protecting the community, exactly? I'm genuine about this, the vaxxed and unvaxxed both spread it at the exact same rate, so where is the protection coming from.

Also, for how long does this amazing community protection last?
No they do not. Anti-vaxxers keep spreading this lie, but it's incorrect.
 
Not sure what the big deal is.
No one is forcing him to get the vaccine.
And it doesn’t seem like he’s under pressure to get it either.

He would know the implications and it appears he is ok with it. While I believe in vaccinations, I also believe everyone has a choice. And those that choose not to accept the vax, also choose to accept the restrictions that places upon them.

There’s plenty of bar and retail work available at the moment for this very reason. People have decided that not getting the vax is more important for them than keeping their job. That’s a decision they are entitled to make and they should be respected for it. But they also should be expected to live with the consequences of their decision.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

i call bullshit, the sausage slinger is not a qualified medical practitioner but those sausages are deffo a foreign substance with the intention of permanently altering my immune system.
Sauce?
 
I'm not sure what you are arguing here.

My point hasn't been that he should be allowed to play without the jab. I'm certainly open to options that allow him to play if possible but it doesn't appear that any concessions can be made by the competition or club.

My point is that if he is going to be denied the right to work, he should be at least compensated with the base payments of his contract in the same way that a redundant employee would be paid out their notice and leave entitlements.

The state govt mandate doesn't stop Carlton or the AFL from fulfilling their financial deal with a player.

At best it's greed from the comp/club to try and save on their salary cap.

At worst it's blackmail.

See you keep leaping to blame the AFL and Carlton for this.

As though they're not simply doing what has been MANDATED by the State Government.

For example;

  • The First Stage is already in effect in Victoria by virtue of the Government’s Authorised Worker Vaccination Mandate and requires Players and Football Program Staff of Victorian Clubs to be vaccinated (first dose 22 October 2021 and fully vaccinated 26 November 2021) prior to being able to attend their Clubs to start or continue their pre-seasons.

Employers in a number of industries are legally required to hold evidence that each employee is fully vaccinated. You can choose not to provide that evidence, but your employer is still legally required to hold that evidence, or to not provide you work outside of your usual place of residence.

An AFL footballer is unable to work from home. Nor can a delivery driver, an electrician, a nurse or a pilot.

There is little-to-no chance that anyone refusing to provide evidence, can therefore claim the full value of the contract they were employed on. FairWork is highly unlikely to uphold any argument down that avenue.

The AFLPA negotiated an arrangement with the AFL regarding players contracts;

COVID-19 vaccination policy for AFL, AFLW players and staff

For Players who do not comply with the Policy and do not have an approved medical exemption, from the date at which a Player is no longer able to perform their contracted services, their Clubs can:

  • Transfer the Player to the inactive player list (meaning the Player can be replaced) and pay the Player 25% of (for AFLW) their contracted salary or (for AFL) the CBA minimum base salary
  • Keep the Player on their playing list (meaning the Player cannot be replaced) and pay the Player not less than 25% of (for AFLW) their contracted salary or (for AFL) 25% of the CBA minimum base salary
  • Terminate the Player’s playing contract with the agreement of the Player
  • Exercise any rights the Club may have at law to terminate the Player’s playing contract, but such rights are not to be exercised prior to 18 May 2022.

You keep making arguments that are entirely and utterly at odds with the legal requirements placed upon clubs by the Government, and the arrangements negotiated between the AFL and the AFLPA (literally, the Players Union, that represents the Players).
 
So if Jones gets the Vax - he won't catch Covid?

Or he won't spread Covid?

How is he protecting the community, exactly? I'm genuine about this, the vaxxed and unvaxxed both spread it at the exact same rate, so where is the protection coming from.

Also, for how long does this amazing community protection last?
You are genuinly wrong.

for one, the probability of a vaxed person getting the virus is much less than unvaxed and you cant spread it if you dont get it.

two, even if a vaxed person does get it their infectious window is much shorter and thus again they are less likely to spread it.

put the two together and vaxed people are dramatically less likely to spread the virus. Not a little bit. Dramatically less.
 
The AFL are disgusting
Be careful what you wish for everyone
You think this power grab by governments is simply going to end here lol
Its not a power grab by governments. Its democratically elected governments reading opinion polls and implementing what the majority want. A society with minimum risk of catching a highly contagious and deadly virus Whilst having no constraints on the way we actually live.

its how democracy works.
 
Its not a power grab by governments. Its governments reading opinion polls and implementing what the majority want. A society with minimum risk of catching a highly contagious and deadly virus Whilst having no constraints on the way we actually live.

Vaxxed catch and spread covid just as much.
This is simply about power and punishment and not about public health.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So, if Jones and whomesoeverelse are fully entitled to not get vaccinated, does that mean that anyone who has been vaccinated is entitled to demand the aforementioned stay away?
 
See you keep leaping to blame the AFL and Carlton for this.

As though they're not simply doing what has been MANDATED by the State Government.

For example;



Employers in a number of industries are legally required to hold evidence that each employee is fully vaccinated. You can choose not to provide that evidence, but your employer is still legally required to hold that evidence, or to not provide you work outside of your usual place of residence.

An AFL footballer is unable to work from home. Nor can a delivery driver, an electrician, a nurse or a pilot.

There is little-to-no chance that anyone refusing to provide evidence, can therefore claim the full value of the contract they were employed on. FairWork is highly unlikely to uphold any argument down that avenue.

The AFLPA negotiated an arrangement with the AFL regarding players contracts;

COVID-19 vaccination policy for AFL, AFLW players and staff



You keep making arguments that are entirely and utterly at odds with the legal requirements placed upon clubs by the Government, and the arrangements negotiated between the AFL and the AFLPA (literally, the Players Union, that represents the Players).

Can you show me where the state government has mandated that employees who do not get vaccinated are to be terminated without pay?

My issue (as it relates to this thread) is with the AFL's direction to clubs that unvaccinated players be stood down with either no pay or as little as 25% of the minimum wage.


"The Blues could put Jones on an inactive list if he does not return, where he would be paid 25 per cent of the minimum wage under the agreement struck between the league and the AFL Players Association, which is approximately $23,000. He would also be paid for the first 36 days of this year’s contract that began on November 1, which is approximately $40,000."

Do we know if Finn Maginness, a player who actually tested positive for COVID, is also being stood down with the same reduction?
 
So, if Jones and whomesoeverelse are fully entitled to not get vaccinated, does that mean that anyone who has been vaccinated is entitled to demand the aforementioned stay away?

This kind of inversion of reality some people are pushing is really stunning to see.

These two rights aren’t equivalent.

The right Jones (and others) are exercising has been an accepted right without punishment for all of your life, and mine. The right “to demand“ unvaccinated people “stay away” from you in public, in workplaces or on airplanes has never been a right. Ever. It has never even been discussed as a right, until five minutes ago. You have never had the right to demand anybody not share a public space with you, no matter who they are, or what their medical status is.

This is a made up right that should not exist — and up until now, hasn’t existed — in a civil society.
 
Last edited:
Anti-Vaxxers love using the term "medical procedure" to make the jab seem far more invasive than it actually is.

If he gets heart inflammation From it
Just tough luck is it?
France and Germany are now halting certain vaccines due to heart risks in young males.

On the other hand the risk of a serious covid case 20-30 age group is like 0.1%
 
Its not a power grab by governments. Its democratically elected governments reading opinion polls and implementing what the majority want. A society with minimum risk of catching a highly contagious and deadly virus Whilst having no constraints on the way we actually live.

its how democracy works.

Tha majority of people want mandatory government/corporate enforced vaccinations?

You sure about that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top