Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
moveurfeet32

Ivy League just cancels all Winter Sports

Recommended Posts

Japan and South Korea are homogenous societies, so they tend to work together better than we could ever hope to in the USA. One nation is an island, and the other may as well be an island given its only land border is closed shut. Both populations have an extremely low percentage of obesity in their countries. 

I read an article a while back that said Japan only had loose lockdowns and experts couldn't cite a single set of their policies that could easily be implemented elsewhere. 

Analyzing just how Japan defied the odds and contained the virus while disregarding the playbook used by other successful countries has become a national conversation. Only one thing is agreed upon: that there was no silver bullet, no one factor that made the difference.

“Just by looking at death numbers, you can say Japan was successful,” said Mikihito Tanaka, a professor at Waseda University specializing in science communication, and a member of a public advisory group of experts on the virus. “But even experts don’t know the reason.”

One widely shared list assembled 43 possible reasons cited in media reports, ranging from a culture of mask-wearing and a famously low obesity rate to the relatively early decision to close schools. Among the more fanciful suggestions include a claim Japanese speakers emit fewer potentially virus-laden droplets when talking compared to other languages.

 

https://time.com/5842139/japan-beat-coronavirus-testing-lockdowns/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Japan and South Korea are homogenous societies, so they tend to work together better than we could ever hope to in the USA. One nation is an island, and the other may as well be an island given its only land border is closed shut. Both populations have an extremely low percentage of obesity in their countries. 

I read an article a while back that said Japan only had loose lockdowns and experts couldn't cite a single set of their policies that could easily be implemented elsewhere. 

Analyzing just how Japan defied the odds and contained the virus while disregarding the playbook used by other successful countries has become a national conversation. Only one thing is agreed upon: that there was no silver bullet, no one factor that made the difference.

“Just by looking at death numbers, you can say Japan was successful,” said Mikihito Tanaka, a professor at Waseda University specializing in science communication, and a member of a public advisory group of experts on the virus. “But even experts don’t know the reason.”

One widely shared list assembled 43 possible reasons cited in media reports, ranging from a culture of mask-wearing and a famously low obesity rate to the relatively early decision to close schools. Among the more fanciful suggestions include a claim Japanese speakers emit fewer potentially virus-laden droplets when talking compared to other languages.

 

https://time.com/5842139/japan-beat-coronavirus-testing-lockdowns/

Are you suggesting that we learn Japanese to prevent further spread of the virus, TBar-san?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, shieldofpistis said:

How does this effect Yiannis run to be 4 timer?

It *appears to me* that he'll be allowed six years to complete his undergraduate degree at Cornell (he's not enrolled this year).  If not, and it is that important to him, he could transfer and take his senior year somewhere else.  Having said that, it's not clear that his Olympic redshirt year negates the Ivy League's now-five-year rule, since it explicitly references "fifth year", and not "extra year."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, klehner said:

It *appears to me* that he'll be allowed six years to complete his undergraduate degree at Cornell (he's not enrolled this year).  If not, and it is that important to him, he could transfer and take his senior year somewhere else.  Having said that, it's not clear that his Olympic redshirt year negates the Ivy League's now-five-year rule, since it explicitly references "fifth year", and not "extra year."

I believe it says fifth year of education at the home institution. If they aren't enrolled it wouldn't necessarily fit the bill here. Plus, I also think it says (I just now read it and may be missing some nuances) that the league won't step in but it will be up to the institutions to decide how to handle each case.

What do you guys think here? I'm not trying to be definitive - just trying to figure it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

I believe it says fifth year of education at the home institution. If they aren't enrolled it wouldn't necessarily fit the bill here. Plus, I also think it says (I just now read it and may be missing some nuances) that the league won't step in but it will be up to the institutions to decide how to handle each case.

What do you guys think here? I'm not trying to be definitive - just trying to figure it out.

The extra year has got to only be for guys that are actually enrolled, right?   That's the whole reason people were talking about PSU, etc. having everyone wrestle instead of potentially some that may have grayshirted.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The extra year has got to only be for guys that are actually enrolled, right?   That's the whole reason people were talking about PSU, etc. having everyone wrestle instead of potentially some that may have grayshirted.

I was about to post something similar.  The NCAA release needs to be read carefully; it doesn't appear to be granting extra years to everyone, just those who compete in 2020-21.  It may need revision if it turns out that there's no competition in 2020-21.

I expect that lawyers will be making lots of money on this issue, once they're done litigating the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The extra year has got to only be for guys that are actually enrolled, right?   That's the whole reason people were talking about PSU, etc. having everyone wrestle instead of potentially some that may have grayshirted.

It says regardless of enrollment this year. I guess Yianni and a couple others get a 5th year relaxation of rules. My read is that if not enrolled this year or another the schools can decide based on their own policies. And with Yianni un-enrolled again- I read that as only leading to a 4th year of education at the home institution as opposed to a 5th year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

It says regardless of enrollment this year. I guess Yianni and a couple others get a 5th year relaxation of rules. My read is that if not enrolled this year or another the schools can decide based on their own policies. And with Yianni un-enrolled again- I read that as only leading to a 4th year of education at the home institution as opposed to a 5th year.

OK you're referring to the Ivy League announcement.   

Here is that again: https://ivyleague.com/news/2020/11/12/general-ivy-league-outlines-intercollegiate-athletics-plans-no-competition-for-winter-sports.aspx

Winter and fall sport student-athletes will not lose a season of Ivy League or NCAA eligibility, whether or not they enroll. Students who wish to pursue competition during a fifth-year of undergraduate education at their home institution, if permitted, or as a graduate student elsewhere will need to work with their institutions in accordance with campus policy to determine their options beyond their current anticipated graduation date."

And here is the NCAA announcement: http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-council-extends-eligibility-winter-sport-student-athletes

"Winter sport student-athletes who compete during 2020-21 in Division I will receive both an additional season of competition and an additional year in which to complete it, the Division I Council decided."

As jdalu posted, the NCAA announcement only refers to those who compete.    Maybe that gets updated now that the Ivy League is not competing, but I'd have to think it would still only apply to those who are enrolled.  The Ivy League statement only says they will not "lose" a season of eligibility, not that they'd get an "additional" one.   

As was discussed in the other thread about this, I wonder if Cornell may have more restrictive rules which is why their lineup is apparently not enrolling, since the Ivy League statement says "if permitted."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AHamilton said:

Are you suggesting that we learn Japanese to prevent further spread of the virus, TBar-san?

No, but I would suggest that casually implying Japan put in place policies that were far superior to what policies were put in place elsewhere is misguided. The factors that saved Japan from a worse covid fate seem to be unknowable, or at best you can guess at them. Most likely it could come down to things like diet, prior good health, and a host of other factors that were already present in Japan's culture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Billyhoyle said:

It’s really not that complicated-look at how effective countries like South Korea/Japan have been.

 

You say "its not really that complicated, look at how effective countries like South Korea and Japan have been", but experts in those countries can't even tell you how they got it right. Apparantly it IS more complicated than your offhand rhetoric suggests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

 

You say "its not really that complicated, look at how effective countries like South Korea and Japan have been", but experts in those countries can't even tell you how they got it right. Apparantly it IS more complicated than your offhand rhetoric suggests. 

Couple things they didnt do: make mask wearing political, and never called it a hoax. Could that have an effect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AHamilton said:

Twenty states aren't primary enforcement.  You generally don't stop someone because their seatbelt is off.  You stop them for speeding and then nail them for the seatbelt.  How would this work with a mask?

Cops are highly scrutinized now more than ever.  You are not being honest with yourself if you think they are going to go out of their way to have a negative interaction with an otherwise law abiding citizen.  Just not realistic.

I think just the threat of it would do the trick. Similar to the seatbelt. Plus people might just realize it’s for their own good and esp the good of others. I’m not saying I’m for this btw just responded to your post and now thinking out loud a bit. If everyone knew it was a mandate enforceable by law I think the public pressure would increase greatly and might be helpful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

I think just the threat of it would do the trick. Similar to the seatbelt. Plus people might just realize it’s for their own good and esp the good of others. I’m not saying I’m for this btw just responded to your post and now thinking out loud a bit. If everyone knew it was a mandate enforceable by law I think the public pressure would increase greatly and might be helpful. 

I think threats are an interesting thing.  I feel that I am pretty courteous regarding mask wearing.  I also live in a community where I can be fined $300 for not wearing a mask outside at all times.  I will admit to not always abiding by this mandate.

For instance, I run marathons.  I had a 13.1 mile run planned for last Saturday.  I am required to wear a mask during this entire run, or I can be fined.  I chose to risk the fine.  I passed within 50 ft of another human a grand total of twice during the run.  When this was the case, I moved to the other side of the street the first time and moved probably 15 ft away from the oncoming (and unmasked) individual.  I am following the science, getting exercise, getting sun and vitamin D.  Do I really need to wear a mask for almost two hours when I barely saw another human and never came within 10 feet?  Absurd dictate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, AHamilton said:

I think threats are an interesting thing.  I feel that I am pretty courteous regarding mask wearing.  I also live in a community where I can be fined $300 for not wearing a mask outside at all times.  I will admit to not always abiding by this mandate.

For instance, I run marathons.  I had a 13.1 mile run planned for last Saturday.  I am required to wear a mask during this entire run, or I can be fined.  I chose to risk the fine.  I passed within 50 ft of another human a grand total of twice during the run.  When this was the case, I moved to the other side of the street the first time and moved probably 15 ft away from the oncoming (and unmasked) individual.  I am following the science, getting exercise, getting sun and vitamin D.  Do I really need to wear a mask for almost two hours when I barely saw another human and never came within 10 feet?  Absurd dictate.

No not really and I get you point.  I guess the devil's advocate take would be yes you were 15 ft away but that's not always the case esp at the start of marathons where it could be an issue.  Easier just to make a blanket rule but I think common sense should be afforded whenever reasonable like your case.  I think a much greater problem is people not wearing them when they should as opposed to wearing them too much.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, AHamilton said:

I think threats are an interesting thing.  I feel that I am pretty courteous regarding mask wearing.  I also live in a community where I can be fined $300 for not wearing a mask outside at all times.  I will admit to not always abiding by this mandate.

For instance, I run marathons.  I had a 13.1 mile run planned for last Saturday.  I am required to wear a mask during this entire run, or I can be fined.  I chose to risk the fine.  I passed within 50 ft of another human a grand total of twice during the run.  When this was the case, I moved to the other side of the street the first time and moved probably 15 ft away from the oncoming (and unmasked) individual.  I am following the science, getting exercise, getting sun and vitamin D.  Do I really need to wear a mask for almost two hours when I barely saw another human and never came within 10 feet?  Absurd dictate.

Yes, you were following the science, but not the other science. Yes, it makes sense to be out exercising and getting sun and vitamin D. However, particularly given enhanced respiration in heavy exercise - it's likely that the 6 feet rule doesn't do enough while running. Hence, you need to extra-social distance. I'm not sure how far that is, but if you were outside, with no mask on, you can be sure it wasn't far enough...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

No not really and I get you point.  I guess the devil's advocate take would be yes you were 15 ft away but that's not always the case esp at the start of marathons where it could be an issue.  Easier just to make a blanket rule but I think common sense should be afforded whenever reasonable like your case.  I think a much greater problem is people not wearing them when they should as opposed to wearing them too much.  

I agree with you on the main issue. I have people in my extended family who probably don't wear them enough.  In my case this weekend, it wasn't a race, it was just me going for a long run.  Technically, I was violating the dictate and could have been given a $300 ticket.

I haven't had a race since last October, but have done 7 virtual races to challenge myself and still make sure my money helped keep the race organizations (mostly charitable) financially stable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Janderson133 said:

Yes, you were following the science, but not the other science. Yes, it makes sense to be out exercising and getting sun and vitamin D. However, particularly given enhanced respiration in heavy exercise - it's likely that the 6 feet rule doesn't do enough while running. Hence, you need to extra-social distance. I'm not sure how far that is, but if you were outside, with no mask on, you can be sure it wasn't far enough...

LOLOLOL

I think you're kidding, but I probably breathe less when my HR is 125 than most adults do when sitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AHamilton said:

I agree with you on the main issue. I have people in my extended family who probably don't wear them enough.  In my case this weekend, it wasn't a race, it was just me going for a long run.  Technically, I was violating the dictate and could have been given a $300 ticket.

I haven't had a race since last October, but have done 7 virtual races to challenge myself and still make sure my money helped keep the race organizations (mostly charitable) financially stable.

Remember you only get 1 set of knees!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

Remember you only get 1 set of knees!

I'm only 51.  I would rather they wear out from overuse than rust out from inactivity.  I'll take up cycling or swimming when that happens!

Thanks for your concern, though!

Edited by AHamilton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AHamilton said:

I think threats are an interesting thing.  I feel that I am pretty courteous regarding mask wearing.  I also live in a community where I can be fined $300 for not wearing a mask outside at all times.  I will admit to not always abiding by this mandate.

For instance, I run marathons.  I had a 13.1 mile run planned for last Saturday.  I am required to wear a mask during this entire run, or I can be fined.  I chose to risk the fine.  I passed within 50 ft of another human a grand total of twice during the run.  When this was the case, I moved to the other side of the street the first time and moved probably 15 ft away from the oncoming (and unmasked) individual.  I am following the science, getting exercise, getting sun and vitamin D.  Do I really need to wear a mask for almost two hours when I barely saw another human and never came within 10 feet?  Absurd dictate.

I would do the same thing. I don't run like you do, but I hike and climb. I come across people infrequently and I do not wear a mask when I am on a remote trailhead. If I do come across someone, inevitably its a younger person who is also not mask wearing. We might get within 6 feet of each other for mere seconds. I am not worried and I doubt they are either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...