Tennis G.O.A.T?

First.Aspect

photonic69 said:

He's a very dislikeable litte shyster and glad he's been booted out.

One thing has just struck me - for years we've all been against and calling out those that use needles in sports, yet here we are doing exactly the opposite. I know it's for different purposes but it still seemed a little ironic and gave me a wry smile. Anyway, send the jab-shy fekker packing and let that be a lesson to others.

That's an interestingly unhelpful comparison about needles.

ugo.santalucia

Personally, I've never been against the "needle". If a particular vitamin, antibiotic or other medication is more effective when administered via a needle, then I don't see the problem.

We tend to confuse doping with medicine...

photonic69

First.Aspect said:

photonic69 said:

He's a very dislikeable litte shyster and glad he's been booted out.

One thing has just struck me - for years we've all been against and calling out those that use needles in sports, yet here we are doing exactly the opposite. I know it's for different purposes but it still seemed a little ironic and gave me a wry smile. Anyway, send the jab-shy fekker packing and let that be a lesson to others.

That's an interestingly unhelpful comparison about needles.

Yes, an interesting dichotomy, innit? I'm all for vaccinations just in case you were wondering.

First.Aspect

ugo.santalucia said:

Personally, I've never been against the "needle". If a particular vitamin, antibiotic or other medication is more effective when administered via a needle, then I don't see the problem.

We tend to confuse doping with medicine...

Sums it up quite well.

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

ugo.santalucia said:

Personally, I've never been against the "needle". If a particular vitamin, antibiotic or other medication is more effective when administered via a needle, then I don't see the problem.

We tend to confuse doping with medicine...

Sums it up quite well.

That'll be because doping doctors said doping was just medicine.

DeVlaeminck

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

You do realise he literally went on a meet and greet with Covid, twice, right?

Govt might also question whether he's had Omicron or not. If he's had delta he'd be a reinfection risk.

It is about public opinion, I agree. Legally does that have a bearing on public interest? I think it does, which makes it even worse for him.

Yes but do you believe he had Covid when he attended those events in Serbia?

If they are expelling him for a valid reason no problem - if they say he lied on his application and have sufficient evidence to satisfy their legal system no problem.

Even the BBC correspondent says its political
"A lot has been said about the motivation behind this - mainly that it's political. And it is. The blaring politics is impossible to escape."

So, either he didn't have Covid when he attended those events and clearly shouldn't have a visa, or he did have Covid when he attended those events and he is a risk to public health because he is reckless and untrustworthy.

Is there another option I've missed?

I agree with you and I've got no problem if they can expel him over cheating the system - I'd happily see him prosecuted for flouting Serbian laws if it's proven he's done so too - it's just the misuse of powers that I disagree with.

ugo.santalucia

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

ugo.santalucia said:

Personally, I've never been against the "needle". If a particular vitamin, antibiotic or other medication is more effective when administered via a needle, then I don't see the problem.

We tend to confuse doping with medicine...

Sums it up quite well.

That'll be because doping doctors said doping was just medicine.

Conconi was pushing the boundaries of legality... the idea was that anything that improves performance is game, before it gets banned (collaboration between him and Moser is an example)*. With Ferrari things moved towards blatant illegal use of medications (including blood).

I suppose if you are a sport physiologist and you have an interest in performance, you are bound to explore new ground. They happened to find some "magic" in blood manipulation, which was far more effective than any banned practice known to date.
In their view, at the time, it was indeed just medicine, since it wasn't banned yet

* it is interesting that the idea of aerobic threshold and ramp test that you folk routinely practice on Zwift was indeed work by Conconi... but we only remember him for doping

Pross

ugo.santalucia said:

Personally, I've never been against the "needle". If a particular vitamin, antibiotic or other medication is more effective when administered via a needle, then I don't see the problem.

We tend to confuse doping with medicine...

'No needles' was always a bit of jargon. It has been perfectly acceptable to use needles for genuine medical prposes.

Pross

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

You do realise he literally went on a meet and greet with Covid, twice, right?

Govt might also question whether he's had Omicron or not. If he's had delta he'd be a reinfection risk.

It is about public opinion, I agree. Legally does that have a bearing on public interest? I think it does, which makes it even worse for him.

Yes but do you believe he had Covid when he attended those events in Serbia?

If they are expelling him for a valid reason no problem - if they say he lied on his application and have sufficient evidence to satisfy their legal system no problem.

Even the BBC correspondent says its political
"A lot has been said about the motivation behind this - mainly that it's political. And it is. The blaring politics is impossible to escape."

So, either he didn't have Covid when he attended those events and clearly shouldn't have a visa, or he did have Covid when he attended those events and he is a risk to public health because he is reckless and untrustworthy.

Is there another option I've missed?

I agree with you and I've got no problem if they can expel him over cheating the system - I'd happily see him prosecuted for flouting Serbian laws if it's proven he's done so too - it's just the misuse of powers that I disagree with.

It's not a misuse of powers though. The Australian system does not currently accept a recent positive as a legitimate reason to not be vaccinated, that rule was being bent for the purposes of the Open. Djokovic then appears to have abused the relaxation. All the rules in place have been through the democratic process and if the Aussies don't like them it is up to them to protest but anyone choosing to enter the country is accepting abiding by the rules. It's like going to Saudi and complaining you aren't allowed to drink alcohol as you are at home (or maybe more like one of the more moderate countries where they've made a relaxation to allow you to drink in your hotel but then choosing to drink in the street outside the hotel then complaining at being arrested).

seanoconn

Murray playing in the Sydney final live on BBC iplayer 8am tomorrow morning.

daniel_b

seanoconn said:

Murray playing in the Sydney final live on BBC iplayer 8am tomorrow morning.

Ta, might watch that whilst on the turbo.

Had planned to go out, but we have sub zero temperatures and lovely fog forecast.

Wheelspinner

DeVlaeminck said:

pblakeney said:

DeVlaeminck said:

pblakeney said:

DeVlaeminck said:

If Australia's concern is people bringing in Covid there's a very obvious and cheap way to prevent that - a test before or on arrival.

Which they do, followed by quarantine. Some try to get round the inconvenience. Some footballers from South America tried (and failed) to beat the system coming back to Europe. Some just think they are too important. They are wrong.

Tests are not conclusive. Our son had tests before departure and on arrival, both were negative. He caught covid in transit.

There have been well over a million cases of Covid in Australia. I'm pretty sure that with a proper testing protocol international sport would offer a tiny risk of adding to those numbers.

It's their right to be inflexible but they shouldn't expect international sport to accommodate them. The bottom line is a lot of athletes around the world are not vaccinated - that could be worked round at no real risk to anyone - so why no just do that?

We know that 2 vaccines barely affect the chances of catching and passing on Covid anyway so why is this a sticking point?
Is it to make life difficult for the unvaccinated - some kind of punishment?

So, how come all the other entrants to the Open are there?
The issue is not with the athletes, it is with stubborn self centred athletes.
Get a vaccine, or go into quarantine, or don't go.
Choices, actions, consequences. Deal with it.

Well not all the other entrants are there are they.

Bit you are missing the point I made. Of course Australia can impose pointless immigration rules if it chooses to - all I said was it shouldn't then be able to hold international competitions such as Olympics, World Champs, World Cup including qualifiers etc because these are world competitions and it's not their right to impose vaccination to compete.

In short Australia can make its own choices and deal with the consequences.

And today's announcement they've revoked his visa on the grounds he's a threat to the health and safety of their population is surely a misuse of power - but Aussies seem to like authoritarian govt so...

So, just for clarity here, the current rules on traveller’s entry to the UK for *unvaccinated* people are that they must spend 10 days in quarantine, and provide test results etc etc.

So, is it ok for England to impose pointless immigration rules, and retain eligibility for big sporting events, but just not Australia?

If Djokovic rocks up 2 days before Wimbledon, no quarantine, no vaccination, and with dodgy paperwork, would you expect the British immigration department to just say “yeah no worries mate, waltz on through…”?

DeVlaeminck

Wheelspinner said:

DeVlaeminck said:

pblakeney said:

DeVlaeminck said:

pblakeney said:

DeVlaeminck said:

If Australia's concern is people bringing in Covid there's a very obvious and cheap way to prevent that - a test before or on arrival.

Which they do, followed by quarantine. Some try to get round the inconvenience. Some footballers from South America tried (and failed) to beat the system coming back to Europe. Some just think they are too important. They are wrong.

Tests are not conclusive. Our son had tests before departure and on arrival, both were negative. He caught covid in transit.

There have been well over a million cases of Covid in Australia. I'm pretty sure that with a proper testing protocol international sport would offer a tiny risk of adding to those numbers.

It's their right to be inflexible but they shouldn't expect international sport to accommodate them. The bottom line is a lot of athletes around the world are not vaccinated - that could be worked round at no real risk to anyone - so why no just do that?

We know that 2 vaccines barely affect the chances of catching and passing on Covid anyway so why is this a sticking point?
Is it to make life difficult for the unvaccinated - some kind of punishment?

So, how come all the other entrants to the Open are there?
The issue is not with the athletes, it is with stubborn self centred athletes.
Get a vaccine, or go into quarantine, or don't go.
Choices, actions, consequences. Deal with it.

Well not all the other entrants are there are they.

Bit you are missing the point I made. Of course Australia can impose pointless immigration rules if it chooses to - all I said was it shouldn't then be able to hold international competitions such as Olympics, World Champs, World Cup including qualifiers etc because these are world competitions and it's not their right to impose vaccination to compete.

In short Australia can make its own choices and deal with the consequences.

And today's announcement they've revoked his visa on the grounds he's a threat to the health and safety of their population is surely a misuse of power - but Aussies seem to like authoritarian govt so...

So, just for clarity here, the current rules on traveller’s entry to the UK for *unvaccinated* people are that they must spend 10 days in quarantine, and provide test results etc etc.

So, is it ok for England to impose pointless immigration rules, and retain eligibility for big sporting events, but just not Australia?

If Djokovic rocks up 2 days before Wimbledon, no quarantine, no vaccination, and with dodgy paperwork, would you expect the British immigration department to just say “yeah no worries mate, waltz on through…”?

Whether that's some short term thing that was brought in for Omicron I don't know but we clearly haven't been insisting Champions League footballers isolate for 10 days. But yes hypothetically if the UK wanted to insist on that I'd say the it would forfeit the right to hold those sort of events.

Ps A quick Google suggests the UK has been flexible with the rules around sports people - seems sensible to me - right from the start of the pandemic elite sport has been treated differently and nobody much complained.

daniel_b

Novacc has been detained now it would seem up until the hearing on Sunday.

Even if the hearing allows him to play, I can see the locals either boycotting his matches, or going with the main aim of booing - I'm sure he could use that as fuel for a few games, but I can't see him managing to see that through the entire tournament.

*Full disclosure - he's my least favourite of all of the top players - I've never taken to his attitude, or his multiple ball bounces on the big points, and to me he comes across as very arrogant, in a way that Federer and Nadal do not - just my personal opinion, not stating that as an indisputable fact.

He/his management should have taken the opportunity to withdraw, and save a bit of reputation, but now everyone knows the players stance. I don't follow tennis that closely, but do keep an eye on the results, and watch some of the grand slams when I am able, and I wasn't familiar with his position on being vaccinated - now the entire world is.

I think if he does play, it's going to detract from the entire tournament, and if he wins - I can't even imagine what the atmosphere would be like.

pblakeney

DeVlaeminck said:

Ps A quick Google suggests the UK has been flexible with the rules around sports people - seems sensible to me - right from the start of the pandemic elite sport has been treated differently and nobody much complained.

Some of us did. The football Euros being the easy example.
Exemptions just because people are sports/famous/rich/celeb are illogical and stupid.

For the record, I predicted Djokovic being the GOAT years ago and stand by that.
I differentiate between performance and personality.

DeVlaeminck

Ok a small minority of people objected.

DeVlaeminck

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/jan/15/novak-djokovic-visa-australian-minister-alex-hawke-says-risk-of-civil-unrest-behind-cancellation

How ridiculous - Djokovic poses a threat of civil unrest!! - hopefully he wins his case to stay this kind of governance by edict should have no place in a democracy.

ballysmate

Wheelspinner said:

DeVlaeminck said:

Wheelspinner said:

DeVlaeminck said:

First.Aspect said:

DeVlaeminck said:

Going forwards there are questions about major sporting events being held in countries requiring vaccination.

What happens if say a world cup qualifier takes place and half the away team aren't vaccinated?

Tough titty, hopefully. There are a lot of idiot footballers not vaccinated and football being football the senior figures in the game have danced around the issue far too much.

It will be beautify to hear managers complaining about team selection because some young primadonna has decided not to get vaccinated.

If it were down to me Australia etc would have to relax their requirements or forfeit the right to stage international competition.

Seriously?

There were plenty of ways available to Djokovic - in this case - to apply for entry to Australia and compete in this tournament. Come through and spend a short while in quarantine period for example.

Instead, he appears to have chosen to (a) lie (b) possibly corruptly had his “health” records altered to suit his lies and (c) blamed others when it appears to be going t!ts up.

Has it escaped your notice that hundreds of other similarly overpaid sports heroes, their entourages, and thousands of fans have managed to turn up for this tournament, by meeting the (temporary) requirements without any drama?

I'm not talking about Djokovic as that's the Australian Open - do what you want with that and people can make their choice. Whether Djokovic has falsified stuff is irrelevant to the point.

That's different to say a world cup qualifier where you may be asking an opposition to play without a significant portion of their first choice team.

How's the weather under the rock in that bubble?

You really aren't paying attention.

ANYBODY - sports people included - can travel to Australia, assuming they have a visa. The only tricky bit is if you are not vaccinated, then on arrival you still need to spend two weeks (I think) in quarantine before doing your thing.

Even Australian citizens returning from abroad who are unvaccinated have to do that I think.

Just to be completely clear the visa that Djokovic and all the other sports people apply for is a "Short Term Working Visa - Sub-category: Professional Sport". They are here to work, earn (sh!tloads of) money. That's it. So, the rules he wants to bend for his personal benefit are the exact same ones that apply to any working professional coming here.

Remind me why unvaccinated sports heroes should be exempt?

Djokovic's honesty is also very much the point, or are sports stars exempt from that requirement as well?

Sorry Mr Djokovic you have failed to meet the entry requirements, furthermore you have been dishonest in your application, fcuk off and we will see you in three years.
The right and proper response from the Aussies.

focuszing723

Novak Djokovic has lost his last-ditch court bid to stay in Australia and is set to be deported.

The Federal Court upheld a government decision to cancel the unvaccinated Serbian player's visa.

The government argued the 34-year-old posed a threat to public health.

Djokovic is now unable to defend his Australian Open title in Melbourne. He was due to play his first match on Monday.

During Sunday's court hearing before a three-judge panel, Djokovic's defence unsuccessfully argued that the grounds given by the government were "invalid and illogical".

Djokovic has been staying at an immigration detention hotel in Melbourne, the same place he was taken after his visa was first revoked following his arrival on 6 January.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-60014059
He can rule out Australia for the next three years to add to his twenty slams.

Pross

As Wheelspinner pointed out previously he was subject to the same entry rules as anyone else so I'm not quite sure why some people seem to think he has been treated harshly. Any mess up was in the processes put in place to circumvent to normal rules.

pblakeney

Vaccinate, quarantine, or don't go.
The choices were always that simple.

DeVlaeminck

Isn't the truth they should never have given him a visa in the first place ?

If they are now banning him for 3 years then presumably they have proof he falsified information on his application - in which case he has no grounds for complaint - otherwise they'd be banning him for their own mistake (or state govt mistake) in allowing him in in the first place.

TheBigBean

DeVlaeminck said:

Isn't the truth they should never have given him a visa in the first place ?

If they are now banning him for 3 years then presumably they have proof he falsified information on his application - in which case he has no grounds for complaint - otherwise they'd be banning him for their own mistake (or state govt mistake) in allowing him in in the first place.

It's an automatic ban when a visa is cancelled.

pblakeney

Isn't the truth that they gave the visa under false pretences?

But yes, anyone who didn't see this coming was a bit silly to put it mildly.

daniel_b

.

ugo.santalucia

Right decision, for Australia and for the tournament, that now can focus on the game, rather than on Djokovic

Pross

I suspect the 3 year entry ban will be quietly lifted once the fuss all dies down.

ugo.santalucia

Pross said:

I suspect the 3 year entry ban will be quietly lifted once the fuss all dies down.

Probably.. I suspect that by 2023 we will be a lot more relaxed about vaccines, tests and whatnot

First.Aspect

https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/status-resolution-service/re-entry-ban

It is only "up to 3 years" anyway, according to this.

But nor is it a given that the entry requirements will be any different next year, and Novax has really gone all in on not being vaccinated.

Dorset_Boy

Sounds like Novax won't get into the US either at present.
If he has half a brain he'll get vaccinated.