Papalii says family reasons behind flu injection stance
Moderator: GH Moderators
Papalii says family reasons behind flu injection stance
Canberra Raiders stars Josh Papalii, Sia Soliola and Joe Tapine protest as NRL considers banning players
Canberra Raiders forwards Josh Papalii, Sia Soliola and Joseph Tapine have protested against the NRL's compulsory vaccination policy after refusing to sign an unmodified waiver.
The grand final trio were no-shows at Raiders headquarters on Wednesday morning, and could end up as part of an NRL anti-vaxxer contingent wiped from the competition for the remainder of the season as the code considers applying a blanket ban to all players who haven't received a flu shot.
Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/raider ... 54qhu.html
Raiders stars wiped out in anti-vax storm: https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/nrl-2 ... 573596c1ab
Raiders trio the latest to reject flu shot: https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... b328c69864
Canberra's Josh Papalii, Sia Soliola and Joe Tapine refuse flu shot, miss training: https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/canberra-r ... 28dad22324
Canberra Raiders forwards Josh Papalii, Sia Soliola and Joseph Tapine have protested against the NRL's compulsory vaccination policy after refusing to sign an unmodified waiver.
The grand final trio were no-shows at Raiders headquarters on Wednesday morning, and could end up as part of an NRL anti-vaxxer contingent wiped from the competition for the remainder of the season as the code considers applying a blanket ban to all players who haven't received a flu shot.
Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/raider ... 54qhu.html
Raiders stars wiped out in anti-vax storm: https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/nrl-2 ... 573596c1ab
Raiders trio the latest to reject flu shot: https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... b328c69864
Canberra's Josh Papalii, Sia Soliola and Joe Tapine refuse flu shot, miss training: https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/canberra-r ... 28dad22324
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Great, now I have to either be an anti-vaxxer or hate on players from my own club
-
- Brett Mullins
- Posts: 1264
- Joined: February 29, 2016, 8:09 pm
- Favourite Player: Clinton Schifcofske
- Location: Canberra
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Sigh... really? In the midst of a global **** pandemic they won’t even get a flu shot... c’mon guys. Get it together.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Sid
- Ricky Stuart
- Posts: 9938
- Joined: May 15, 2015, 8:47 pm
- Favourite Player: Shannon Boyd
- Location: Darwin, N.T.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
If neither the nrl or players budge on this issue than that’s season over right there for the Raiders
Would have won Boogs - 2016, 2017, 2018
1 part green, 1 part machine
1 part green, 1 part machine
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Stand them down without pay if they aren’t willing to get the shots and while they’re stood down their training can be to read the vast amount of peer reviewed research and history about vaccines.
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
This is probably an ignorant question, but... what does the flu shot have to do with the coronavirus? If the flu shot wasn’t mandatory before, why are they making it so now?
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
As explained in the story, not having the flu shot means you’re not only at risk of contracting a virus with almost identical symptoms to coronavirus (with the obvious implications that has for the club and NRL competition)... but you’re also at more risk of contracting coronavirus due to a weakening of the immune system. And if you contract both, you’re potentially very seriously ill.
- Postman Pat
- Jason Croker
- Posts: 4888
- Joined: March 9, 2008, 8:22 pm
- Favourite Player: Hodgson
- Location: Sylvania
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Your immunity will be lowered if you catch the flu, making it more likely you will have an intense reaction if you catch Covid-19.the bone wrote:This is probably an ignorant question, but... what does the flu shot have to do with the coronavirus? If the flu shot wasn’t mandatory before, why are they making it so now?
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Basically you don’t want to catch one on top of the other, just ask New York residence.
Member no: RAI-2913997
Dare To Dream, and believe in Green, for 2019.
Dare To Dream, and believe in Green, for 2019.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
They should be stood down. It sounds like all they had to do was sign a liability form, acknowledging they are at increased risk of influenza if they do not get the vaccination.
'I've got 17 blokes in that dressing room that are hurting'
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Fair enough. Though as I’m Bate Man said, my understanding of the immune system is it will effect the response of your body to a virus, but it won’t make it more or less likely for you to contract it in the first place.greeneyed wrote:As explained in the story, not having the flu shot means you’re not only at risk of contracting a virus with almost identical symptoms to coronavirus (with the obvious implications that has for the club and NRL competition)... but you’re also at more risk of contracting coronavirus due to a weakening of the immune system. And if you contract both, you’re potentially very seriously ill.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
-
- Dean Lance
- Posts: 837
- Joined: May 9, 2007, 11:20 am
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Clearly they should get the shot. IMO anti vacs are ignorant and selfish. Think they’re informed because they’ve read some crackpot Facebook posts of other anti-vacs. Forget peer reviewed research and vaccination success rates. I think they put everyone’s health at risk, particularly kids and vulnerable people.
However anti flu shot is a bit different to traditional anti vacc. The flu shot is basically a lottery each year where four strains of flu are chosen and protection given. If the flu strain you catch ain’t one of them, you have no protection. In the Covid era though, for all the reasons outlined in other posts, professionals should get them.
That said, pretty sure the NRL will struggle to enforce this. No one will be banned and they will play; it’s all just RL drama and hype, and a part of why we love the game.
And sorry to harp, but when blokes like tarpine allegedly refuse a flu shot citing some Pentecostal born again Christian belief about not putting drugs in their body, but then hit the piss like fish when they get a chance? They are hypocrites and it’s cringe worthy listening to that garbage
However anti flu shot is a bit different to traditional anti vacc. The flu shot is basically a lottery each year where four strains of flu are chosen and protection given. If the flu strain you catch ain’t one of them, you have no protection. In the Covid era though, for all the reasons outlined in other posts, professionals should get them.
That said, pretty sure the NRL will struggle to enforce this. No one will be banned and they will play; it’s all just RL drama and hype, and a part of why we love the game.
And sorry to harp, but when blokes like tarpine allegedly refuse a flu shot citing some Pentecostal born again Christian belief about not putting drugs in their body, but then hit the piss like fish when they get a chance? They are hypocrites and it’s cringe worthy listening to that garbage
Last edited by Old School Green on May 6, 2020, 11:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
87, 89, 90, 91, 94, 19
I was there. Go the Milk !!
I was there. Go the Milk !!
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
That's what I was thinking as wellPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Unless it's explicitly in their contracts or their agreement, how is it enforceable?
Also Cartwright posted on twitter that players sign a waiver if they don't want to have it
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Agreed with all that Old School Green.
A few years ago I asked my local GP what % of her patients come in for the flu shot, and she said it was only about 33%, though she did say that others were provided the shot by their pharmacist or employer. But the point is, there are a bunch of people out there that don’t get the flu shot, but I don’t consider them anti-vaxers. I get mine every year, and am always puzzled why other people don’t.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
A few years ago I asked my local GP what % of her patients come in for the flu shot, and she said it was only about 33%, though she did say that others were provided the shot by their pharmacist or employer. But the point is, there are a bunch of people out there that don’t get the flu shot, but I don’t consider them anti-vaxers. I get mine every year, and am always puzzled why other people don’t.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
I see the point you’re making, but it’s semantics. If you have the flu shot, you effectively get immunity and you don’t fall sick with the relevant strains of flu if you do come in contact with it.the bone wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 10:55 pmFair enough. Though as I’m Bate Man said, my understanding of the immune system is it will effect the response of your body to a virus, but it won’t make it more or less likely for you to contract it in the first place.greeneyed wrote:As explained in the story, not having the flu shot means you’re not only at risk of contracting a virus with almost identical symptoms to coronavirus (with the obvious implications that has for the club and NRL competition)... but you’re also at more risk of contracting coronavirus due to a weakening of the immune system. And if you contract both, you’re potentially very seriously ill.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Not just the hypocritical nature annoys me but the special privilege, religious exemptions are no longer permitted for vaccines the only people exempt are rightfully those with medical reasons.Old School Green wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:00 pm And sorry to harp, but when blokes like tarpine allegedly refuse a flu shot citing some Pentecostal born again Christian belief about not putting things drugs in their body, but hit the piss like fish when they get a chance, are hypocrites and it’s cringe worthy listening to the garbage
“Religious viewpoints are different to ethical viewpoints and that’s why the ethical deniers will simply be told ‘you don’t have to take the needle, you’re not forced to take the needle, but you will not play NRL this season’.”
Sorry but if it’s ok for religious reasons it should also be ok for ethical ones, what’s the difference?
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
- FuiFui BradBrad
- Bradley Clyde
- Posts: 8651
- Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
- Favourite Player: Phil Graham
- Location: Marsden Park
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Yeah this is my thinking, especially with the message that came out of the NRL that the players should be responsible for what goes into their bodiesPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.
Nickman's love of NSW
Nickman's love of NSW
- NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
- NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
The issue is the three Raiders players refused to sign the waiver in an unaltered form.-TW- wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:08 pmThat's what I was thinking as wellPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Unless it's explicitly in their contracts or their agreement, how is it enforceable?
Also Cartwright posted on twitter that players sign a waiver if they don't want to have it
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
My comment was more to say, the flu shot won’t effect whether or not you contract the coronavirus. The flu shot will however ensure that you are not struck down by both the flu and coronavirus.greeneyed wrote:I see the point you’re making, but it’s semantics. If you have the flu shot, you effectively get immunity and you don’t fall sick with the relevant strains of flu if you do come in contact with it.the bone wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 10:55 pmFair enough. Though as I’m Bate Man said, my understanding of the immune system is it will effect the response of your body to a virus, but it won’t make it more or less likely for you to contract it in the first place.greeneyed wrote:As explained in the story, not having the flu shot means you’re not only at risk of contracting a virus with almost identical symptoms to coronavirus (with the obvious implications that has for the club and NRL competition)... but you’re also at more risk of contracting coronavirus due to a weakening of the immune system. And if you contract both, you’re potentially very seriously ill.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Yeah because they didn’t agree with what it said. Why should they sign something they don’t agree with?greeneyed wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:18 pmThe issue is the three Raiders players refused to sign the waiver in an unaltered form.-TW- wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:08 pmThat's what I was thinking as wellPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Unless it's explicitly in their contracts or their agreement, how is it enforceable?
Also Cartwright posted on twitter that players sign a waiver if they don't want to have it
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Enough with all this crap. Let’s go back to September 2019. I’ve had enough of 2020.
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3763
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Unless the three of them have used the off season to get PhDs in immunology they should shut the **** up and do what their doctors say.
As for Tapine claiming religion? Unless you’re going teetotal as well Joe, save it you hypocrite.
There are few people I loathe more than anti-vaxxers. Lowering herd immunity and putting people with ACTUAL conditions that prevent them from being vaccinated at risk because they saw a video on Facebook once about vaccines.
It’s ignorant and it’s selfish. I won’t be looking at the three of them the same way again.
As for Tapine claiming religion? Unless you’re going teetotal as well Joe, save it you hypocrite.
There are few people I loathe more than anti-vaxxers. Lowering herd immunity and putting people with ACTUAL conditions that prevent them from being vaccinated at risk because they saw a video on Facebook once about vaccines.
It’s ignorant and it’s selfish. I won’t be looking at the three of them the same way again.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
They don’t have to. But in the current circumstances, I wouldn’t argue with the NRL if they told them they don’t get to train or play with their club. Obviously, I wouldn’t want them to be unavailable... but that may be their choice.Peter wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:25 pmYeah because they didn’t agree with what it said. Why should they sign something they don’t agree with?greeneyed wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:18 pmThe issue is the three Raiders players refused to sign the waiver in an unaltered form.-TW- wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:08 pmThat's what I was thinking as wellPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Unless it's explicitly in their contracts or their agreement, how is it enforceable?
Also Cartwright posted on twitter that players sign a waiver if they don't want to have it
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Enough with all this crap. Let’s go back to September 2019. I’ve had enough of 2020.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
As I understand it, the point the medical experts are making is that if they get the flu, their immune system is lowered, which means they are less able to fight off the coronavirus too.the bone wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:21 pmMy comment was more to say, the flu shot won’t effect whether or not you contract the coronavirus. The flu shot will however ensure that you are not struck down by both the flu and coronavirus.greeneyed wrote:I see the point you’re making, but it’s semantics. If you have the flu shot, you effectively get immunity and you don’t fall sick with the relevant strains of flu if you do come in contact with it.the bone wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 10:55 pmFair enough. Though as I’m Bate Man said, my understanding of the immune system is it will effect the response of your body to a virus, but it won’t make it more or less likely for you to contract it in the first place.greeneyed wrote:As explained in the story, not having the flu shot means you’re not only at risk of contracting a virus with almost identical symptoms to coronavirus (with the obvious implications that has for the club and NRL competition)... but you’re also at more risk of contracting coronavirus due to a weakening of the immune system. And if you contract both, you’re potentially very seriously ill.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Yep exactly rightgreeneyed wrote:As I understand it, the point the medical experts are making is that if they get the flu, their immune system is lowered, which means they are less able to fight off the coronavirus too.the bone wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:21 pmMy comment was more to say, the flu shot won’t effect whether or not you contract the coronavirus. The flu shot will however ensure that you are not struck down by both the flu and coronavirus.greeneyed wrote:I see the point you’re making, but it’s semantics. If you have the flu shot, you effectively get immunity and you don’t fall sick with the relevant strains of flu if you do come in contact with it.the bone wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 10:55 pmFair enough. Though as I’m Bate Man said, my understanding of the immune system is it will effect the response of your body to a virus, but it won’t make it more or less likely for you to contract it in the first place.greeneyed wrote: As explained in the story, not having the flu shot means you’re not only at risk of contracting a virus with almost identical symptoms to coronavirus (with the obvious implications that has for the club and NRL competition)... but you’re also at more risk of contracting coronavirus due to a weakening of the immune system. And if you contract both, you’re potentially very seriously ill.
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
It's a fair question, and I'm not sure whether these players or the NRL could tell us how ethics are different from religious dictums.Manbush wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:16 pmNot just the hypocritical nature annoys me but the special privilege, religious exemptions are no longer permitted for vaccines the only people exempt are rightfully those with medical reasons.Old School Green wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:00 pm And sorry to harp, but when blokes like tarpine allegedly refuse a flu shot citing some Pentecostal born again Christian belief about not putting things drugs in their body, but hit the piss like fish when they get a chance, are hypocrites and it’s cringe worthy listening to the garbage
“Religious viewpoints are different to ethical viewpoints and that’s why the ethical deniers will simply be told ‘you don’t have to take the needle, you’re not forced to take the needle, but you will not play NRL this season’.”
Sorry but if it’s ok for religious reasons it should also be ok for ethical ones, what’s the difference?
Furthermore I'm not sure society as a whole should care.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
I think this is a ridiculous stance for the nrl to take. Im not an anti vaccer. My kids and pets are completely vacced up. The flu shot is where i draw the line. Not on principle but because I've witnessed time and time again that people who take the shot display flu like symptoms shortly after. Indeed the last time i had the flu 12 years ago followed the one time i had a flu shot. Im not referring to a sample size of one i manage a semi large team and i see it happen time and time again. Now i appreciate there is bias at play here and I've by no means conducted a controlled study, but the point is that at the very least, taking the flu shot does not prevent people from later experiencing flu like symptoms so why on earth would the nrl get so hung up on it
-
- Brett Mullins
- Posts: 1473
- Joined: July 11, 2015, 5:57 pm
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Canberra
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Three clowns. Who would have guessed....
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
****.
well, I guess you could say that I'm buy curious.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Yes, people occasionally get mild flu like symptoms. That's the nature of how vaccines work to stimulate your immune system to produce antibodies. However modern flu shots contains no actual live flu virus so it is impossible for it to give you the flu.FROG wrote: ↑May 7, 2020, 6:02 am I think this is a ridiculous stance for the nrl to take. Im not an anti vaccer. My kids and pets are completely vacced up. The flu shot is where i draw the line. Not on principle but because I've witnessed time and time again that people who take the shot display flu like symptoms shortly after. Indeed the last time i had the flu 12 years ago followed the one time i had a flu shot. Im not referring to a sample size of one i manage a semi large team and i see it happen time and time again. Now i appreciate there is bias at play here and I've by no means conducted a controlled study, but the point is that at the very least, taking the flu shot does not prevent people from later experiencing flu like symptoms so why on earth would the nrl get so hung up on it
The facts are available and they show that the shot reduces the chance of getting the flu by 60% on average. It can be higher or lower depending on the strains that year. It also reduces the chance of hospitalisation if you do catch it.
It saves thousands of people each year and does no harm, so really there is no good excuse to not get it.
- Dusty
- Ruben Wiki
- Posts: 5501
- Joined: December 21, 2009, 12:25 pm
- Favourite Player: Past:Daley
Present: Hodgson
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Has it been stated as to their reason for not wanting it?
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
2020: 1. Nicol-Klokstad 2. Cotric 3. Croker (c) 4 Leilua 5. Scott 6. Wighton 7. G. Williams 8. Papalii 9. Hodgson (c) 10. Sutton 11. J. Bateman 12. Whitehead 13. Tapine ----
14. Simmonson 15. Soliola 16. Guler 17. Horsburgh
14. Simmonson 15. Soliola 16. Guler 17. Horsburgh
- Dusty
- Ruben Wiki
- Posts: 5501
- Joined: December 21, 2009, 12:25 pm
- Favourite Player: Past:Daley
Present: Hodgson
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Season looks over
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse
2020: 1. Nicol-Klokstad 2. Cotric 3. Croker (c) 4 Leilua 5. Scott 6. Wighton 7. G. Williams 8. Papalii 9. Hodgson (c) 10. Sutton 11. J. Bateman 12. Whitehead 13. Tapine ----
14. Simmonson 15. Soliola 16. Guler 17. Horsburgh
14. Simmonson 15. Soliola 16. Guler 17. Horsburgh
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
And this seems the pettiest part to me. If you don’t want the flu shot on religious grounds, that’s fine, but I’m doubting that any religion has strong views on the actual efficacy of the flu vaccine.greeneyed wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:18 pmThe issue is the three Raiders players refused to sign the waiver in an unaltered form.-TW- wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:08 pmThat's what I was thinking as wellPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Unless it's explicitly in their contracts or their agreement, how is it enforceable?
Also Cartwright posted on twitter that players sign a waiver if they don't want to have it
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Honestly, just sign the waiver.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
Yep, season over.
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32524
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
“The report claims the three players all crossed out a line in the standardised waiver which stated they accept they are at greater risk of contracting the flu if they refuse the vaccine.”
Seems a bit childish to me. Refusing the shot is one thing. Refusing to sign a waiver acknowledging the potential ramifications is becoming petulant.
Seems a bit childish to me. Refusing the shot is one thing. Refusing to sign a waiver acknowledging the potential ramifications is becoming petulant.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Re: Raiders stars protest as NRL considers banning players
We already have many different scenarios in Australia where without the correct vaccinations you are not able to part take in some things.-TW- wrote: ↑May 6, 2020, 11:08 pmThat's what I was thinking as wellPeter wrote:Their body, their choice. Cannot force them and the NRL will be hard up trying to ban them without severe legal ramifications.
Unless it's explicitly in their contracts or their agreement, how is it enforceable?
Also Cartwright posted on twitter that players sign a waiver if they don't want to have it
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Daycare for example...
It's managed to avoid legal challenges so far
These players dont have a legal right to play for the NRL, or any club.
The NRL however do have legal obligations to reasonably protect it's employee and contractors. In this scenario, and given the weight of evidence around debunking anti-vaxxers, good luck getting a verdict in court to say what the NRL are doing is taking unreasonable steps to protect their staff.
They dont have to have the jab, but like all of us, there is ramifications for your choices. For these players, it may be that they simply can not play NRL in a COVID19 world. I hope they have weighed their decision carefully, this team is in a very good spot right now and i would think there is 13-20 players with an eye on the prize who will not be thrilled about 3 of their best players making themselves unavailable due to ill informed petulance.