Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Tennis


GuerrillaMonsoon
 Share

Recommended Posts

At this point, maybe Australia should deport everyone involved in this mess.  There's really no one to root for or feel sorry for.

Aussie Open officials are supposedly campaigning for Djokovic privately, while fending off questions about how blind their exemption review process really was.

Australian government is probably only drawing a line in the sand on this because they need to score a political win and thought Djokovic would be an easy target.

Djokovic is probably getting treated poorly, but he's such an asshat that it's hard to be too sympathetic.  Apparently he didn't let a positive COVID test affect his public appearance schedule.  He also lied on his visa application about international travel in the two weeks prior to arriving in Australia.

For good measure, maybe somebody should deport his dad somewhere, as well as the Serbian officials who keep comparing Joker to Jesus Christ and concentration camp survivors.  I think he's being treated shoddily, but dialing down the rhetoric wouldn't hurt.   I'm assuming someone working for Djokovic understands current immigration policies and COVID rules and bothered to explain them to him.  This mess was entirely foreseeable.  Djokovic apparently thought no one would try to apply the rules to him.  He's that dude that gets wasted on New Years' Eve, then is surprised when he gets stopped at the sobriety checkpoint that was announced in the local media every day since Christmas.

Djokovic really may get banned from at least three of the four majors, possibly for multiple years.  Lol, if only there were some way to avoid this......  Maybe some day, they'll invent a COVID vaccine.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, Tarheel Moneghetti said:

At this point, maybe Australia should deport everyone involved in this mess.  There's really no one to root for or feel sorry for.

Aussie Open officials are supposedly campaigning for Djokovic privately, while fending off questions about how blind their exemption review process really was.

Australian government is probably only drawing a line in the sand on this because they need to score a political win and thought Djokovic would be an easy target.

Djokovic is probably getting treated poorly, but he's such an asshat that it's hard to be too sympathetic.  Apparently he didn't let a positive COVID test affect his public appearance schedule.  He also lied on his visa application about international travel in the two weeks prior to arriving in Australia.

For good measure, maybe somebody should deport his dad somewhere, as well as the Serbian officials who keep comparing Joker to Jesus Christ and concentration camp survivors.  I think he's being treated shoddily, but dialing down the rhetoric wouldn't hurt.   I'm assuming someone working for Djokovic understands current immigration policies and COVID rules and bothered to explain them to him.  This mess was entirely foreseeable.  Djokovic apparently thought no one would try to apply the rules to him.  He's that dude that gets wasted on New Years' Eve, then is surprised when he gets stopped at the sobriety checkpoint that was announced in the local media every day since Christmas.

Djokovic really may get banned from at least three of the four majors, possibly for multiple years.  Lol, if only there were some way to avoid this......  Maybe some day, they'll invent a COVID vaccine.

The problem is the minister accepted that he has entered on a valid medical exemption, but this his presence now poses a risk to public order. Had they relied on his inconsistencies misleading them into that view that would’ve been a point they could argue, but by conceding the valid exemption, his public appearance after testing positive has no real bearing on the decision. Unless the argument is going to be made that his flouting of Covid rules rises to the level of posing that risk, which is patently absurd. While he clearly gives the impression that he is skeptical of the vaccines, there is little public commentary from him on the subject and certainly no sustained call to the public to avoid them/break all Covid restrictions. There have been countless examples worldwide of high profile celebrities and politicians beaching mask/distancing regulations (such as the minor breaches with the Indian cricket team last summer), with little to no formal punishment (at least where the acts would’ve given rise to the possibility of charges/fines being imposed). So to argue that it is fine to boot him, when we have taken no action against those who had previously breached those same rules here, seems relatively unjust.


But really the key argument as I understand it on Djokovic’s side is that by not considering what the alternative to their decision was, they couldn’t possibly arrived at the decision they made because their decision invites the same reaction it purports to avoid, whereas the alternative decision would’ve ameliorated the reaction they were concerned about. In a state where there are high levels of vaccinations, it is hard to argue that his presence would have any great effect either way on vaccination rates. In the alternative, it is very easy to see this decision leading to further civil unrest and pushing anti vaxxers further in their demonstration. In simpler terms, really the main threat to public order is over enthusiastic Serbs over celebrating a win for him and will be all over and done in 3 weeks max. By not letting him in, it would seem to provide more fuel to the conspiracy theorists/tin foil hat brigades fire. The case will basically rest on if the court thinks that level of unreasonableness rises to level requiring judicial intervention or not.
 

The problem I personally have with “He’s a dickhead so get rid of him however we can” argument is that the arguments used to support it lead to a very slippery slope, where it is not difficult to foresee certain political parties in desperation using the same ones used to boot Djokovic to target certain classes of people/religion. It is hard to argue that letting Djokovic in will fuel anti vax sentiment, without also acknowledging, that the next time a Bourke St (The Sisto murder and not Gargosoulas) or Lindt Cafe situation occurs, the Islamaphobes would be emboldened to try and use that same tool to restrict migration from Muslim countries. Personally, the unintended consequences from much of the restrictions during Covid (especially the normalisation of restrictions), would seem to pose a much greater risk to our way of life once the pandemic ends than the benefit they provide during the pandemic. It is not difficult to see migration from poorer countries with high Covid rates restricted long into the future, which at its core is a message of “ Keep away you dirty poor stupid sick people and don’t you dare try infect us with you presence”, which is the antithesis of everything this Country has claimed to stand for. If anything, the last 24 months have shown how stupid, selfish and vain Australia really is.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Death From Above said:

Djokovic has been one of the most public anti-vaxxers literally on earth for nearly 3 years, there's no slippery slope here beyond "shut the fuck up and read a book".

This.

Novak Djokovic has lost his appeal. Breaking news. Deportation for Djokovic.

Edited by The Natural
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feel bad for the poor bastard informing Novax Djokovic he's lost his appeal so he'll be deported and won't be defending his Australian Open title. The world #1 and 9 time champion there, damn. Novax is hot headed at the best of times but this would have sent him over the edge. Be funny if Rafael Nadal wins as he, Roger Federer and Novax are tied on 20 Grand Slam Titles.

Edited by The Natural
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 1/15/2022 at 3:37 AM, Thunder Down Under said:

 

The problem is the minister accepted that he has entered on a valid medical exemption, but this his presence now poses a risk to public order. Had they relied on his inconsistencies misleading them into that view that would’ve been a point they could argue, but by conceding the valid exemption, his public appearance after testing positive has no real bearing on the decision. Unless the argument is going to be made that his flouting of Covid rules rises to the level of posing that risk, which is patently absurd. While he clearly gives the impression that he is skeptical of the vaccines, there is little public commentary from him on the subject and certainly no sustained call to the public to avoid them/break all Covid restrictions. There have been countless examples worldwide of high profile celebrities and politicians beaching mask/distancing regulations (such as the minor breaches with the Indian cricket team last summer), with little to no formal punishment (at least where the acts would’ve given rise to the possibility of charges/fines being imposed). So to argue that it is fine to boot him, when we have taken no action against those who had previously breached those same rules here, seems relatively unjust.


But really the key argument as I understand it on Djokovic’s side is that by not considering what the alternative to their decision was, they couldn’t possibly arrived at the decision they made because their decision invites the same reaction it purports to avoid, whereas the alternative decision would’ve ameliorated the reaction they were concerned about. In a state where there are high levels of vaccinations, it is hard to argue that his presence would have any great effect either way on vaccination rates. In the alternative, it is very easy to see this decision leading to further civil unrest and pushing anti vaxxers further in their demonstration. In simpler terms, really the main threat to public order is over enthusiastic Serbs over celebrating a win for him and will be all over and done in 3 weeks max. By not letting him in, it would seem to provide more fuel to the conspiracy theorists/tin foil hat brigades fire. The case will basically rest on if the court thinks that level of unreasonableness rises to level requiring judicial intervention or not.
 

The problem I personally have with “He’s a dickhead so get rid of him however we can” argument is that the arguments used to support it lead to a very slippery slope, where it is not difficult to foresee certain political parties in desperation using the same ones used to boot Djokovic to target certain classes of people/religion. It is hard to argue that letting Djokovic in will fuel anti vax sentiment, without also acknowledging, that the next time a Bourke St (The Sisto murder and not Gargosoulas) or Lindt Cafe situation occurs, the Islamaphobes would be emboldened to try and use that same tool to restrict migration from Muslim countries. Personally, the unintended consequences from much of the restrictions during Covid (especially the normalisation of restrictions), would seem to pose a much greater risk to our way of life once the pandemic ends than the benefit they provide during the pandemic. It is not difficult to see migration from poorer countries with high Covid rates restricted long into the future, which at its core is a message of “ Keep away you dirty poor stupid sick people and don’t you dare try infect us with you presence”, which is the antithesis of everything this Country has claimed to stand for. If anything, the last 24 months have shown how stupid, selfish and vain Australia really is.

I think that you do a very good job at trying to differiantiate and try to see all sides here. You are a better person than me for it. Maybe I don't know enough about the political climate in Australia, especially regarding visa and immigration politics. Since I'm a guy on a message board I still have an opinion, though... 

I thought the major issue behind the revoked visa was that Djokovic (or his agent) either provided false information or outright lied in the documents to obtain a visa, though. Which imo is reason enough to revoke a visa even without the whole anti-vaxx discussion. 

Also, I won't feel any sympathy for Djokovic. It's an opinion, but with all the stuff surrounding his "medical exemption", I'm 100% sure he and probably the Serbian Ministry for Public Health forged documents in an attempt to get him into the tournament. I'm very sure at least some of those involved feel like this, but nobody will outright say it because it wouldn't be diplomatic to go "We all know your story doesn't add up, Djokovic!" 

And as a personal note, although far away and never been to Australia: I took many restrictions because of the shitty pandemic. I'm by far not the man who had it worst during this whole thing, but like many people I was and still am OK with putting the needs of everyone before mine.

Djokovic even 2020 held his own tournament series and subsequent parties with tennis players from around the world just for the sake of it. Of course a lot of people got infected, Djokovic flew home without testing. Guess who had the fucking virus?! And if you criticized those events, you were instigating a witch hunt, according to the guy.

Later on, while people were still dying to the virus, he claimed Serbian people were protected against Covid because of "Lion genes". So yeah, that dude is no victim, he's a lunatic conspiracy theorist and major part of the problems that still arise handling this pandemic. It's his right to be an idiot, but the consequences are also his to bear from my p. o. v. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's certainly refreshing for once to see someone rich and powerful  be punished for their actions. It's a breath of fresh air, compared to, say, the parties held at 10 Downing Street, during lockdown. 

I wonder if this clears a path for Nadal to win the Open, without his main rivals being there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jimbo_Tsuruta

At thirty-four and with a net worth of $220M that's probably a wrap for Novak, if I were him I'd put my feet up and enjoy retirement. Time for the younger lads to step up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Australian elections aren’t first post the post, so the government has been losing “two party preference” polls for awhile.

Possibly coincidental timing for a swing away from the government that involves voters mostly moving towards “Other” during the whole Novak saga.

In other words, might be a new prime minister for the 2023 Australian Open. Depending on if some voters who rank the government low are still going to rank them ahead of the main competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rafael Nadal beats Denis Shapovalov in five sets to reach semi-finals of the Australian Open. It's something that Nadal's only won it once in 2009. If Rafael Nadal wins, he'll be on 21 Grand Slam Men's Titles and one more than Roger Federer/Novax Djokovic.

Edited by The Natural
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ash Barty has become the first Aussie finalist in the AO for the first time since 1980. She'll face American Danielle Collins. 

In the Men's draw:  Tsitsipas and Medvedev face in one semi. Berrettini and Nadal are in the other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel for Nadal.

He's not even in the final yet and already some of the local TalkBack sport stations are getting the "Would he have beaten Novak?" topic going.

Even if he wins this there's going to be people putting an asterisk on it 😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ashleigh Barty beat Danielle Collins to win the Australian Open title, ending the home nation's 44 year wait for a Grand Slam women's singles champion. Barty has previously won the French Open, Wimbledon and now the Australian Open so she needs the US Open to complete the set.

Edited by The Natural
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Natural said:

Rafael Nadal has come from two sets down to tie Daniil Medvedev in the final of the men's Australian Open. C'mon Rafa!

21 Grand Slams! 21 Grand Slams! 21 Grand Slams!

Edited by The Natural
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nadal joins Novax, Emerson and Laver as the only men to win each Grand Slam twice.

Nadal is the first man in the Open Era to come back from two sets down in an Australian Open final to win the title.

Edited by The Natural
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...