Talk About Tennis 2.0

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 8:40 pm The idiot in me still is puzzled by the simplest of facts: he is NOT vaccinated. Australians need to be vaccinated, visitors more so.
All this circus, legal proceedings and the such boil down to that: he is not vaccinated, and therefore, out you go, dude. You are not in compliance.

There are medical exemptions - for citizens for sure, and apparently for visitors. They are narrow, but recent COVID is an exemption for citizens. Unclear whether it is for foreigners. It must be because apparently that's why Djokovic earned an exemption. (And in that case, why was Voracova's visa cancelled? I know she chose not to fight it, but why was it cancelled in the first place?) If it's a legal reason for an exemption for foreigners, then Djokovic doesn't qualify. I agree that this is simple, and I don't know if the Australian government knows which way it is or if there is internal confusion about it. (How??) Early reporting said the feds told TA isn't not a basis for a medical exemption for players but journalists sort of dropped that point and quickly moved on to the court case and now the legitimacy of Novak's test and his fail to isolate.

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:20 pm Early reporting said the feds told TA isn't not a basis for a medical exemption for players but journalists sort of dropped that point and quickly moved on to the court case and now the legitimacy of Novak's test and his fail to isolate.

It seems the judge was confused about this point as well? I was confused as to why that wasn't a bigger point in the hearing.

Woody wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:10 pm ...

Oh, Ponchi... You missed my Twitter account from 2020... I forget why I added the extra x.

https://twitter.com/NovaxxDjoCovid

Case closed. NO ONE beats TAT2.0! No one

MJ2004 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:25 pm

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:20 pm Early reporting said the feds told TA isn't not a basis for a medical exemption for players but journalists sort of dropped that point and quickly moved on to the court case and now the legitimacy of Novak's test and his fail to isolate.

It seems the judge was confused about this point as well? I was confused as to why that wasn't a bigger point in the hearing.

Well, apparently that wasn't the issue presented to the court. Sometimes a judge will stick to the issue presented and sometimes a judge will expand the scope and evaluate related or underlying issues, too. It appears this judge did not extend his scope to examining the merits of the exemption. Only the due process part that was raised. I wish the judge had gone farther and said, "While we're here, let's take the time to see if the due-process violation even mattered. Let's see the documents submitted for a medical exemption and compare them to the exemption requirements, visa requirements, and entry requirements." But he didn't. He decided it wasn't his job.

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:20 pm
There are medical exemptions - for citizens for sure, and apparently for visitors. They are narrow, but recent COVID is an exemption for citizens. Unclear whether it is for foreigners.

It's not unclear. Tennis Australia and Craig Tiley not liking the answer they received doesn't make it unclear.

What prompted him to get "tested" on Dec. 16? Was he identified as a contact through someone? If so, who is that someone and where's their positive test? I'm hung up on what was he going to do had he not "tested positive" to get into Australia?

Owendonovan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 2:31 am What prompted him to get "tested" on Dec. 16? Was he identified as a contact through someone? If so, who is that someone and where's their positive test? I'm hung up on what was he going to do had he not "tested positive" to get into Australia?

The basketball game that he attended (maskless) had covid positive people and they're saying that prompted him to get tested. What was the plan otherwise? Inquiring minds want to know, but some complicated lie I assume, he seems to be specializing in those at the moment.

AO draw has just been postponed with no explanation given and no new schedule announced. I would infer that they are anticipating Novak's withdrawal.

Woody wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 4:45 am AO draw has just been postponed with no explanation given and no new schedule announced. I would infer that they are anticipating Novak's withdrawal.

Woody updates are in the Aus Open tournament thread.

Tl;dr Chaos

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:46 pm

MJ2004 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:25 pm

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:20 pm Early reporting said the feds told TA isn't not a basis for a medical exemption for players but journalists sort of dropped that point and quickly moved on to the court case and now the legitimacy of Novak's test and his fail to isolate.

It seems the judge was confused about this point as well? I was confused as to why that wasn't a bigger point in the hearing.

Well, apparently that wasn't the issue presented to the court. Sometimes a judge will stick to the issue presented and sometimes a judge will expand the scope and evaluate related or underlying issues, too. It appears this judge did not extend his scope to examining the merits of the exemption. Only the due process part that was raised. I wish the judge had gone farther and said, "While we're here, let's take the time to see if the due-process violation even mattered. Let's see the documents submitted for a medical exemption and compare them to the exemption requirements, visa requirements, and entry requirements." But he didn't. He decided it wasn't his job.

Indeed - as I said earlier, the rules for entry to Australia by non-citizens are clearly printed somewhere - and, using that as the base measurement, it would take a 12 year old child less than 5 minutes to determine if Djokovic (or anyone else) qualifies for entry. It's black and white.

The reason it's taking as long as it is is twofold: A) because several parties seem to have either been thoroughly incompetent in their comprehension of what is required, and/or they have lied outright in order to get what they want (Djokovic, Tennis Australia, Craig Tiley, Melbourne state government), and B) because whenever politicians and/or lawyers become involved, their perpetual self-serving manipulations and twisting of facts and truths takes a while to sort out.

Martina seems confused...

"Let Him Play", Martina Says...

"Go Home", Martina Tells Djokovic...

.

As much as I believe he probably didn't deserve his visa, I think Australia has missed the window to kick him out. They should have determined long ago whether he's in the country legally or not. Like when they cancelled his visa. Certainly should not have taken them more than a day after the hearing to weigh any addition evidence presented at the court hearing.

I guess Paul Sakkal didn't have good sources inside the govt telling him the minister was going to revoke the visa. It appears he was misled and/or didn't exercise proper judgment with his sources.

Well, let's this be a reminder to all the world, as if it was needed, that there is a reason why people want to be rich and powerful. The rules do not apply to you.
Now it is just a matter of seeing how will the 50% capacity Aussie crowd received him.