Djokovic´s Dilemma

First topic message reminder :

Djokovic has spent a lot of time complaining about COVID restrictions during the pandemic. But I don´t recall him yet missing a big tournament as a result. For at least one tournament, I seem to recall it was the Olympics, he tried to imply or say he was very doubtful about attending, presumably in his attempt to use his star power to get at least some rules changed. When this didn't work, when they called him on his bluff about not attending, he folded and went anyway.

Now, he has got two choices, and neither seems great from his perspective and given his beliefs.

1. Get vaccinated and attend the Australian Open. This would be a total fold, a clear admission of bluffing, and a very clear admission that he has been trying to use his star power to get rule changes rather than genuinely not planning to attend. It's sort of an admission of defeat.

2. Don´t play the Australian Open. This means giving up on one of his best chances to retire with the most slams. His attendance at this event could yet make all the difference. This also risks the vaccination issue coming up over and over again at other tournaments. Will other slams have similar rules? Is he also prepared to miss them?

slashermcguirk wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:A legacy that will forever be tainted, trying to use one's vast wealth to circumvent a countries border controls. Those dodgy tests will not be forgotten.

Nope, he is already the most successful player of all time in terms of big titles won. Do I need to share the stats? :-) I am not into popularity contests.

Stats aren't the be all and end all, class matters and Djokovic has none.

Then why ignore all his charitable work?

Charitable work doesn't mean someone has class, I could reel off numerous names that prove that point.

You know him well in fairness, nobody can judge a man’s class more than a person who has never met him. Always find it interesting that all the next gen players say he a really nice guy who gives the most time to lower ranked players despite being number one. Also likes of Murray who have known him years say he is a really nice guy off the court. More inclined to go by what they say than simply what you read in the media

I'm in the same position as you then and it doesn't stop you waxing lyrical about the guy so those in glass houses and all that.

Falsifying test results or ignoring self isolation rules is a big indicator of the guys class. Thankfully Federer and Nadal do have class.

Agree to disagree

To summarize:

---Correct decision in the end.
---But could have been much better handled, he should have been told no in advance of flying.
---Dragged on too long, media went to town a bit, a relief it´s over I think.

The question about the Spiegel report still requires further investigation because if there is any possibility that something was falsified, especially if Djokovic himself was involved, it would be in the public interest to know one way or another. Am I right in thinking that Djokovic + family + team haven´t commented? Does that look suspicious? let me know if I missed any updates on that this weekend.

I would say this has hurt the ability of Novak to get money from commercial sponsorships. I think this is not bad enough to lead to cancellation of existing deals, but is bad enough to seriously impair future details. My guess would be he has halved his earnings over the next ten years with this, something like that.

We all knew Novak was a bit of a knob.What comes as more of a surprise is that the country who actually should treat him well seeing as how he has won the only grand slam that nobody cares about,nine times, and could have had a ticker-tape 10th event, every ones a winner. Except, he gets messes around, moved back and forth to a crummy hotel, whilst the world’s media, particularly the British, calls him all the names under the sun.
He didn’t deserve that.
Instead of all that great publicity for AO, Australia now looks like a country sliding towards apartheid.

I think Djokovic is worth close to 300 million, he should be ok regardless of future sponsorships:-)

DS, Australian open has the same weighting as the other 3 slams, not sure how it would be considered lesser?? Regardlsss he has such an even spread of slams (even 6 Wimbledons). Only player to have won all slams at least twice. Had Soderling not beaten Nadal in 2009, Federer wouldnt even have one French

But not the same cultural clout as the other three slams. Wimbledon obviously the most important, with the USOpen being anecdotally at least the tournament most players saying means the most to them; the sheer task involved in winning on the clay in Roland Garros gives it a uniqueness.The Aussie Open is the easiest to win, and it seems that the big three all stand an equally good chance there.Its a bit Meh.

Agree with the points about Federer/ Soderling, and the six Wimby titles. I  have nothing against ND in fact I think it’s annoying how the public seem to be anti him simply because they were pro one of the others!

His belief in homeopathic medicine is to me loony, but we need loonies in the entertainment world.

Looks like the French President Macron is going to only allow vaccinated people into public buildings and this is going to result in a no vax no play policy for Roland Garros as he institutes a policy to get more people vaccinated. The French sports minister had to back track on earlier comments made regarding Djokovic in the wake of Djokovics deportation from Australia.

Djokovic has supposedly started the process of becoming full vaccinated according to reports in his country.

In the recent Commonwealth Games cricket final, between Australia and India, an Australian player (one of the best in their XI) played the match despite being positive for Covid-19 at the time. Not seeing much Australian outrage at this.

Presuming it's OK for Djokovic to turn up next year?