SLU Game Postponed
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
Why is the A-10 letting covid university SLU make any covid related decisions? So now, all of a sudden, SLU is worried about a tier 4 contact tracing issue that does not affect protocols and whether games are played or not? SLU? The school that hasn't given a damn about covid all year? The same "expert" SLU medical staff that could not keep their players free from covid for over a month? We can't make them play the game, but the A-10 can. This one is on the A-10, and of course, on the pieces of garbage from SLU.
Just as long as it's not Eagles/Phillies/Sixers/Flyers stuff. That makes up half of what UR athletic employees tweet about.
I can’t find an NCAA definition of tier 4, but here’s the definition of tier 3:
“This tier includes individuals who provide event services but are not in the same vicinity with Tier 1 individuals ... Examples of relevant individuals include certain operational staff (e.g., housekeeping, catering, sanitation and transportation) and media/broadcast”
Assuming tier 4 is lower than that, sounds like someone who has no contact with the team tested positive, and SLU saw it as an easy way out
“This tier includes individuals who provide event services but are not in the same vicinity with Tier 1 individuals ... Examples of relevant individuals include certain operational staff (e.g., housekeeping, catering, sanitation and transportation) and media/broadcast”
Assuming tier 4 is lower than that, sounds like someone who has no contact with the team tested positive, and SLU saw it as an easy way out
So John somebody broke the super secret confidentiality agreement already? Good work. Maybe Mooney just learned what the hell happened too in the newspaper.
This is just BS from SLU. Yes, safety first, and I am a big follower of the safety first theme, but that is why we have protocols and the testing. The teams were cleared to play. So you play. You can't just let the SLU medical staff, who is obviously not capable of taking care of their own team, decide a game is too risky to play because, what, they saw someone sneezing 100 feet from the Robins Center? Screw SLU.
Noah dropping a bomb on U of R....
While this does not seem related to the SLU fiasco who knows. If we are allowing entry to Robins Center from student athletes that would otherwise be banned from campus we are not exactly following our own internal protocols. Hardt and the UR admin seem to be out to lunch again, a meat and potatoes meal no doubt.
Noah raises some excellent points. But 1 piece of advice Noah. You've poked the bear. Do not be surprised if some of your access now dries up.
While this does not seem related to the SLU fiasco who knows. If we are allowing entry to Robins Center from student athletes that would otherwise be banned from campus we are not exactly following our own internal protocols. Hardt and the UR admin seem to be out to lunch again, a meat and potatoes meal no doubt.
Noah raises some excellent points. But 1 piece of advice Noah. You've poked the bear. Do not be surprised if some of your access now dries up.
If I read between the lines, we say no one tested positive, but do we state that all players were tested? Is that the issue? I hope that we’re testing everyone and not just a select few. Why leave anything open to second guessing?
And if it is so clear that we did the right things, why all the super secret BS???
And if it is so clear that we did the right things, why all the super secret BS???
Which is my problem. It basically said, we just trusted UR enough to give it the league title game, but we also are going to cave to SLU (and essentially now any other school that for any reason doesn't feel comfortable playing a game). Pretty bad precedent.
Really sounds like the risk would have been extremely slim to none, but SLU saw it as “if we have any more positive tests we won’t get 13 games and our season will be over.” Don’t think they bailed because they were scared to lose. But it really does seem like a cop out from them to cancel, when all close contacts and players tested negative.
I guess if, for example, a janitor who cleans the locker room tests positive, now anyone can bitch and moan and get a game cancelled
I guess if, for example, a janitor who cleans the locker room tests positive, now anyone can bitch and moan and get a game cancelled
My understanding is that Tier 4 are close contacts entirely outside the program. Girlfriends, family members, roommates...
So in order not to miss any more games, SLU opted to miss a game. Solid logic from them. Looking to them for intelligent perspective on covid protocols is like running a battle plan past Custer in advance, just to make sure it's foolproof.
How many Tier 4 losses do we have this season?
That group seems like it would have more contact than Tier 3 to the players. If I’m not mistaken, most people live with their roommates...
Agree. A number of ppl like yourself r claiming forfeit tho. That's fine as opinion I'm just saying the league has ruled on it already. & found at least some validity to their claims thus no forfeit. Whether they should have or not we don't really know bc UR has clammed up. They went the "confidentiality" route. That doesn't exactly scream benefit of the doubt.
I agree that SLU should have played. Micro problem at this point. Our big hat no cattle operation is the macro problem that persists.
Reminds me of a military inspection. If the inspecting officer wants to, he (or she) can find something that "fails" inspection and whether it actually meets the criteria is irrelevant because authority is held by the inspecting officer. In this case SLU searched diligently to find something (after they arrived) because the information would have been obtainable before they made the trip. The A-10 said we will go along with that.
My point though, GK, is that it should have been a forfeit because we did nothing wrong. The league went against its existing protocols to NOT award us a forfeit. In doing so, it now essentially has said "No team will ever be made to forfeit an A10 game for any reason." So just change the bylaws to say as much at this point.
So your argument is that they chartered a plane, booked hotel suites, and chartered a return plane just to find a flaw in our contact tracing?
Wasn’t StL hoping to be invited to the Big East a few years ago? Is this just an attempt to placate the Bils and keep them in the conference?
Either that or SLU exposed a loophole in the A10 policies that UR was using and the A10 didn’t want to look bad. Like say that a roommate was exposed and UR didn’t do testing. If that’s allowed, everyone looks bad. But we can all agree the lack of information is bad. And as Noah points out, for all the money UR has, deciding to not testing people now seems like an odd time to say we need to save money. That we have no transparency has always been an issue and looks like it won’t stop.
SLU is back in town Feb. 23 to play VCU. Can't wait to see what excuses they come up with then.
isn't contract tracing part of the protocol? And SLU objected to that part of it...presumably based on JOC reporting. And the A10 agreed with SLU. So I'm not sure we can state we did nothing wrong. No matter what Hardt or UR says who frankly are not very believable imo. Tell us the exact objection and then u me and others can make an more informative judgement. UR won't do that. Right now there is 1 other party that was privy to it all (the A10) and they ruled for SLU.
Seems crystal clear to me. SLU is looking for 13 games period. So they are going to take whatever they think is the least risky path. The A10 wants SLU to be eligible for the NCAAs too - especially since it is the only A10 team currently ranked.
What good does a forfeit do? Definitely doesn’t count as a game for SLU and wouldn’t be looked upon as a real win for UR either. I guess you could “fool” a computer, but you aren’t fooling the committee.
Basically comes down to a big disappointment.
And I hate the "the A-10 had nothing in place in case this came up" nonsense. Of course they had nothing in place. They already had things in place and everything was fine. That's like saying the A-10 did not have anything in writing saying teams must play the game if it is exactly 50 degrees outside. It's just garbage. SLU flat out did not want to play this game and of all teams, a fear of getting covid could not possibly be the answer. There could be plenty of other reasons a Travis Ford coached team could try to beat the system. Maybe they had a guy hurt, maybe they had some guys sick, maybe they just want to get to 13 games and feel like they will get in without a couple more losses.
Sure, just guessing here, but they backed out, not us. So, the questions should be asked of them, not us. And, have they asked about these so-called tier four contacts before every game they played? I mean, no rules were in place about it, so how did they know other teams didn't have tier 4 issues?
A forfeit would prevent this from happening again. This is already a very bad look for the A-10. And, to make it worse, it was the top two pre season teams playing in an ESPN2 game. Do they really want this happening a couple more times this year?
Maybe they should have had that attitude five weeks ago before their own terrible contact-tracing and mitigation efforts resulted in almost all of their players getting covid. We shouldn't have to pay the price for their own stupidity and subsequent fear now.
My goodness, covid university SLU backs out of a game, and you are blaming us? Unreal.
4700 - yes - I’m blaming UR for lack of transparency, which is not new. Has been going on for decades. If UR was transparent than we could be able to blame SLU with full conviction.
Somewhat OT but how do the computers handle a forfeit? That might be a question for SFSpidur or Chop. As stated a forfeit really doesn't help us. Maybe in computers I don't know but unlikely in committee eyes.
Also perhaps I've missed it but where did this Tier 4 stuff come from? I have not seen anything reported or stated by UR/SLU that this relates to Tier 4. It could but there is very important confidentiality agreement in place at UR.
Also perhaps I've missed it but where did this Tier 4 stuff come from? I have not seen anything reported or stated by UR/SLU that this relates to Tier 4. It could but there is very important confidentiality agreement in place at UR.
I'm not going to be celebrating Dick Cheney's legacy, ever.
John Chaney, on the other hand...
UR may not be able to be transparent, but the story is essentially out there now. SLU had an issue with contact tracing by UR. This implies there was a positive test somewhere. However, it seems this positive test wasn’t enough to stop the game, as we cleared all UR and A10 protocols (as stated by Hardt, but also as evidenced by the fact that our program has not paused due to covid). So, by the rules, we were fit to play. SLU had issue with this, and didn’t want to take a risk of another positive. So, the way I see it, there’s two possibilities:
1) the rules are not strict enough, and playing yesterday would have possibly been dangerous
2) SLU is being super conservative and is unwilling to take even a tiny risk
To me, possibility 2 seems like the more realistic one (especially considering we had to shut down earlier in the year due to what has been said was a false positive - clearly the protocols are strict). Not sure how UR is to blame for following A10 protocols and wanting to play a game that was clear to be played according to A10 rules.
Lack of transparency? Ever heard of privacy laws to protect students, if this were student related? And, if this somehow relates to a player, what good comes out of throwing him under the bus? I'm sure future recruits would love seeing guys treated like that, right? Unreal. Transparency? You are missing the bigger picture here. The teams were cleared to play. Period. So we did things right. Period. Just because SL freaking U comes up with reasons to not play does not mean we should be the ones to take blame and throw our "tier 4" contacts and anyone assisted with that contact under the bus. Unbelievable.
That's the bottom line to me too: We met all requirements for the game to be held. SLU decided that wasn't good enough.
And, SLU of all teams decided it wasn't good enough. St. covid infested Louis, who hasn't cared about covid all year, all of a sudden does? It's not like we are talking about a team who has done everything right this year, been covid free all year, and taken numerous steps to avoid their players getting it who had some concerns. We are talking about St covid Louis. I can only imagine how Travis Ford was running things before all their outbreaks happened. Yes, I'm sure they were real cautious and concerned then.
Similar threads
