Novak Djokovik

Should he be deported

  • Of course he should!

    Votes: 57 81.4%

  • No way!

    Votes: 5 7.1%

  • I don't care

    Votes: 8 11.4%
  • Total voters
    70
Tigger.ufo

Tigger.ufo

Lady Penelope
Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,988
Name
Heather
Edit My Images
Yes
My personal view is that he should go without disputing it further and if he does appeal he should be deported and banned for three years.

Can we keep this out of Hot Topics please!
 
Don't care as we don't know the full ins and outs of this.

Was he promised he could enter, it does sound like the Aussies are scrambling around for something to ban him with.

Personally. if the rules say you need to be vaccinated to enter he shouldn't have gone, end of. But if he was promised he could enter and now they are having 2nd thoughts that's something different
 
It may just be media reporting, but the timing of his +ve test, and his behaviour after it give rise to serious questions of truthfulness.

He is a very good tennis player, but not one that I have ever warmed to, and some of his behaviour on and off court has been very poor.

Tennis Australia appear to have messed up with what they told him (Federal versus State rules, rule updates etc.), but more importantly, he appears to have treated the visa application process with contempt. It was potentially the most important Grand Slam ever for him, and he knew there were very strict entry rules, but he didn’t properly check his application? Pull the other one…
 
Pound Coin said:
It may just be media reporting, but the timing of his +ve test, and his behaviour after it give rise to serious questions of truthfulness.

He is a very good tennis player, but not one that I have ever warmed to, and some of his behaviour on and off court has been very poor.

Tennis Australia appear to have messed up with what they told him (Federal versus State rules, rule updates etc.), but more importantly, he appears to have treated the visa application process with contempt. It was potentially the most important Grand Slam ever for him, and he knew there were very strict entry rules, but he didn’t properly check his application? Pull the other one…
Click to expand...

I doubt he personally had anything to do with it - it would be is PA/advisors that sort this sort of stuff out as would Tom Cruise, Madonna or any other high profile celeb.
 
cambsno said:
I doubt he personally had anything to do with it - it would be is PA/advisors that sort this sort of stuff out as would Tom Cruise, Madonna or any other high profile celeb.
Click to expand...
In that case he should have had better staff. It all comes back to him.
 
Forgetting things and ticking wrong boxes then breaking restrictions. First plane home.
 
Yes, should've already been on the first flight home. I did foresee this (no, I am NOT Doris Stokes or Mystic Smeg), he was basically giving the world the middle finger when he announced he was going to the Australian Open. Sends the wrong message when you can get lawyers to get your around the restrictions. And if his documentation is wrong, it's not his agent's responsibility, it's his. You just have to watch programmes like Border force to see that the entry into AUS is pretty well controlled.

And for Farage to weigh in, that really does send the wrong message.
 
Aussie state, federal government, Novak and his team have all handled the whole saga poorly imo. From the TV coverage it seems he is getting very little sympathy from the Aussie public especially since he admitted g=breaking covid rules when he knew he had tested positive.Think Boris might invite him over here as they have so much in common.
 
nog said:
Aussie state, federal government, Novak and his team have all handled the whole saga poorly imo. From the TV coverage it seems he is getting very little sympathy from the Aussie public especially since he admitted g=breaking covid rules when he knew he had tested positive.Think Boris might invite him over here as they have so much in common.
Click to expand...

The Aussie state and government have done nothing wrong, it was down to the tennis authorities and the lying Djoko and his team, plus anyone else supporting his lying and cheating.
 
I wish I could filter the news to ensure I never hear a thing about him or tennis (or any sport for that matter).
 
andya700 said:
The Aussie state and government have done nothing wrong, it was down to the tennis authorities and the lying Djoko and his team, plus anyone else supporting his lying and cheating.
Click to expand...
I’m fairly certain you are in the minority believing they have handled this well, agree with the last bit you say though
 
Through all this he was supported by his legal team. All form filling would have been closely checked by them.
You can be sure any errors were deliberate, and had little regard for the truth.

I rather doubt that his Second dose of Covid was real at all, it would be so easy to have set up a volunteer test. and it was so conveniently timed to let him enter Australia as having had a recent case of Covid. Unfortunately it seems that he forgot he was supposed to be down with covid when he gave that interview. That is a more likely explanation than him giving an interview when he knew he was sick with Covid. I suspect that the second infection was an invention in an attempt to give him exemption.

(I do not believe in such convenient coincidences, such as testing positive in such a narrow window to afford him exemption, sound too good to be true.)

The whole affair seems extraordinarily complex, time consuming, expensive and destructive, compared to getting a vaccination.
It just shows how paranoid anti-vaxxers are. and how far removed they are from living in the real world.
 
Last edited:
Didn’t the Australian government originally send him confirmation allowing him to enter?
 
Pete R said:
Didn’t the Australian government originally send him confirmation allowing him to enter?
Click to expand...
All visas are provisional, and the conditions are subject to verification at point of entry.
He failed that verification process.
At that point, he could have gone home.
However he chose to appeal.
The subsequent detentions and court cases are the direct result of that choice.

All this has done is to demonstrate that,
Paranoia about vaccinations, does not give, anyone, exemption from the law.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
Through all this he was supported by his legal team. All form filling would have been closely checked by them.
You can be sure any errors were deliberate, and had little regard for the truth.

I rather doubt that his Second dose of Covid was real at all, it would be so easy to have set up a volunteer test. and it was so conveniently timed to let him enter Australia as having had a recent case of Covid. Unfortunately it seems that he forgot he was supposed to be down with covid when he gave that interview. That is a more likely explanation than him giving an interview when he knew he was sick with Covid. I suspect that the second infection was an invention in an attempt to give him exemption.

(I do not believe in such convenient coincidences, such as testing positive in such a narrow window to afford him exemption, sound too good to be true.)

The whole affair seems extraordinarily complex, time consuming, expensive and destructive, compared to getting a vaccination.
It just shows how paranoid anti-vaxxers are. and how far removed they are from living in the real world.
Click to expand...
The timing of this second infection, and his behaviour afterwards, do make it seem that it could be less than watertight.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Through all this he was supported by his legal team. All form filling would have been closely checked by them.
You can be sure any errors were deliberate, and had little regard for the truth.

I rather doubt that his Second dose of Covid was real at all, it would be so easy to have set up a volunteer test. and it was so conveniently timed to let him enter Australia as having had a recent case of Covid. Unfortunately it seems that he forgot he was supposed to be down with covid when he gave that interview. That is a more likely explanation than him giving an interview when he knew he was sick with Covid. I suspect that the second infection was an invention in an attempt to give him exemption.

(I do not believe in such convenient coincidences, such as testing positive in such a narrow window to afford him exemption, sound too good to be true.)

The whole affair seems extraordinarily complex, time consuming, expensive and destructive, compared to getting a vaccination.
It just shows how paranoid anti-vaxxers are. and how far removed they are from living in the real world.
Click to expand...

It does seem awfully convenient to catch covid to have that isolation period end just before flying to Australia.

What was his alternative plan? Not go at all? I really doubt it.
 
Just hope the anti Vaxers reading this realise that although you can now fly to and from the u.k with impunity doesn’t mean other countries will let you enter unless fully jabbed
 
the black fox said:
Just hope the anti Vaxers reading this realise that although you can now fly to and from the u.k with impunity doesn’t mean other countries will let you enter unless fully jabbed
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the definition of "fully jabbed" might change.

I got my third last Friday so I'm up to date as of today but some new variant could at any time lead to another jab being required to be fully jabbed. I'm not planning any flights anytime soon but I wouldn't take anything for granted as the world seems to have gone mad recently, in one direction or another depending on your own views and beliefs.

Oh, forgot to comment on the man himself. If in charge of this fiasco I think I'd have been tempted to test him for antibodies and if he has them wave him through with an instruction that he must keep his contact with others to an absolute minimum as C19 of one variant or another seems to be rampant in Australia I can't really see his presence making any difference at all unless of course the authorities object to his personal views and comments which seems the case.
 
Last edited:
His families comments on his treatment seem rather over the top, maybe his lawyers should check represent them in interviews.
 
woof woof said:
Unfortunately the definition of "fully jabbed" might change.


Oh, forgot to comment on the man himself. If in charge of this fiasco I think I'd have been tempted to test him for antibodies and if he has them wave him through with an instruction that he must keep his contact with others to an absolute minimum as C19 of one variant or another seems to be rampant in Australia I can't really see his presence making any difference at all unless of course the authorities object to his personal views and comments which seems the case.
Click to expand...
yes he has attempted to bend the rules to suit himself as has BJ now he is reaping what he has sown .. the old adage the bigger you are the harder you fall comes to mind .
 
woof woof said:
......

Oh, forgot to comment on the man himself. If in charge of this fiasco I think I'd have been tempted to test him for antibodies and if he has them wave him through with an instruction that he must keep his contact with others to an absolute minimum as C19 of one variant or another seems to be rampant in Australia I can't really see his presence making any difference at all unless of course the authorities object to his personal views and comments which seems the case.
Click to expand...
unfortunately australia seems more interested in enforcing rules for the sake of rules rather than applying common sense - look at their daft helmet rules for cyclists to see why they like random rules that make no sense
 
boliston said:
unfortunately australia seems more interested in enforcing rules for the sake of rules rather than applying common sense - look at their daft helmet rules for cyclists to see why they like random rules that make no sense
Click to expand...

I believe you a trolling now. Put simply, he did not meet the requirements for entry. Those rules apply to everyone, not just him.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
I believe you a trolling now. Put simply, he did not meet the requirements for entry. Those rules apply to everyone, not just him.
Click to expand...

But he did meet the rules. AFAIK. Didn't it all go to court and he won? He's now being or has been expelled because his views may promote anti vaccine arguments. From the BBC...

"Djokovic launched his case after Immigration Minister Alex Hawke used his powers to cancel his visa, arguing his presence in the country risked fanning anti-vaccine sentiment."
 
the black fox said:
yes he has attempted to bend the rules to suit himself as has BJ now he is reaping what he has sown .. the old adage the bigger you are the harder you fall comes to mind .
Click to expand...

As above.

Australia can let in or keep out whoever they want of course, it's their country, but are they following the science? That's perhaps another question.

Again, the BBC.

"The decision to cancel Djokovic's visa - after a court previously ruled in his favour - is largely about saving face with Australian voters in an election year."

"The immigration minister, Alex Hawke, had the option to use his executive powers to cancel the visa and deport Djokovic and he did.
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 maybe not following the science at all then? Maybe a political decision.
 
Last edited:
The Australian people were solidly behind revoking his visa. As was the government, as indeed was the ruling of the supreme court.
They may not let him back for three years.
That is the reality.
I would suggest few Australians believe his story.
They hate even more the idea that he should get special treatment.
 
woof woof said:
But he did meet the rules. AFAIK. Didn't it all go to court and he won? He's now being or has been expelled because his views may promote anti vaccine arguments. From the BBC...

"Djokovic launched his case after Immigration Minister Alex Hawke used his powers to cancel his visa, arguing his presence in the country risked fanning anti-vaccine sentiment."
Click to expand...


I think you will find that he DIDN'T meet the rules ... which was why his visa was cancelled in the first place.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
The Australian people were solidly behind revoking his visa. As was the government, as indeed was the ruling of the supreme court.
They may not let him back for three years.
That is the reality.
I would suggest few Australians believe his story.
They hate even more the idea that he should get special treatment.
Click to expand...

As I said, it's their country but aren't we getting into a different area when we appear to ban people because we don't like their (what should be perfectly lawful) views? And remember that not wanting a vaccine should be a legally acceptable position. Didn't many nations sign up to not using coercion to force people to undergo medical procedures? Although I have seen a counter argument that this isn't coercion, it's simply warning people of serious consequences for refusing the jab. I see that as playing with words and mental gymnastics but others may see and agree with the distinction. Looking at the risks, isn't a fit younger man at minimal risk anyway? These are all arguments which seem to be irrelevant these days but I do think this is a slippery slope.
 
Tigger.ufo said:
I think you will find that he DIDN'T meet the rules ... which was why his visa was cancelled in the first place.
Click to expand...

But it all went to court and he won. He's now out seemingly for political reasons.

Look, some seem to take this very personally and some seem to have very fixed views. So having put an alternative view and one apparently supported by the BBC news site I'm now out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top