Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
How do you say kook en francais?
Vaccines required for RG this year
- Thread starter Steffi-forever
- Start date
- Status
How do you say kook en francais?
movdqa
Talk Tennis Guru
A lot of progressives actually hate Democrat politicians and their policies.
Best to get the actual facts.
NonP
Legend
Ask Americans how much $$$ per month they would sacrifice to do more on "climate change".
They did that in Germany where everybody think there must be "done something against global warming".
The result?
Most people were willing to pay about €20 per month.
Very individualistic...
That's exactly why individualism can't solve our climate crisis or another large-scale problem, genius.
You're still not getting it. You thought I was referring to you even though I named the very idiot you had quoted, so I tried to clear up that misunderstanding with that devil emoticon. You keep taking offense where none was intended.
Born_to_slice
Legend
Watch out, "karma" always strikes gloating idiots when they least expect it.
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
Vasek Pospisil is probably now regretting saying that if Novak had thought he didn't have a valid exemption he wouldn't have played.
It makes it a bigger climbdown if Novak now decides to get vaccinated. It won't matter to his actual fans - the sensible ones will applaud this and the lunatic fringe will just feel it enhances its martyr status - but his new anti-vax followers will be furious.
It makes it a bigger climbdown if Novak now decides to get vaccinated. It won't matter to his actual fans - the sensible ones will applaud this and the lunatic fringe will just feel it enhances its martyr status - but his new anti-vax followers will be furious.
It's actually in Djokovic's interests for the slams (or rather for the countries they happen to be hosted in) to take an incredibly hard-line stance on vaccines, because it will force him to yield.
I think he is willing to sacrifice a lot to avoid a vaccine, he is willing to miss 1 slam and probably more than that.
But I doubt he will sacrifice the rest of his physical prime and miss almost every slam for 1-2 years. He didn't want to get surgery on his elbow for around a year or more in 2017-18, and eventually he yielded on that because he couldn't play at the top anymore without it.
I think he is willing to sacrifice a lot to avoid a vaccine, he is willing to miss 1 slam and probably more than that.
But I doubt he will sacrifice the rest of his physical prime and miss almost every slam for 1-2 years. He didn't want to get surgery on his elbow for around a year or more in 2017-18, and eventually he yielded on that because he couldn't play at the top anymore without it.
The Vaccines still need to be renewed every 6 months and its questionable if they work against Omicron at all - People are fed up with repeated vaccinations and politicians are sensing the shift.
My guess is that by summer, the Corona Pass will be a thing of the past.
and in due time, i suspect Australia are going to issue a formal apology to Mr Djokovic for the treatment he received after being invited to defend his title, and being incarcerated like a common criminal. and nothing would be more appropriate than that.
My guess is that by summer, the Corona Pass will be a thing of the past.
and in due time, i suspect Australia are going to issue a formal apology to Mr Djokovic for the treatment he received after being invited to defend his title, and being incarcerated like a common criminal. and nothing would be more appropriate than that.
What happened was that Djokovic claimed to have recorded a positive Covid test, a claim not disputed by the Australian authorities. He then applied through the official channels to play the Australian Open and was granted permission to play. He also received a visa to enter Australia from the national government of Australia. As the 9 time champion aiming to participate in the largest single event held in Australia each year, Djokovic would reasonably have expected he had the right to enter the country. As the judge at the initial hearing exclaimed: "What more could this man have done." Subsequently Djokovic lost a court case not on the merits of any argument related to him, but on whether or not the Minister had acted within his powers in ordering his expulsion. The above summary is what happened.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
No, it isn't and it has been explained over and over.
It's precisely what happened. A millimetre perfect explanation.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
What have I written that was false?
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Pick a point. Like I said it's wrong from start to finish. You pick an issue and I'll tear it to shreds for you.
I'm not doing it for you. Read my post and tell me what is false in it.
Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
Comme Pierrot?
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
toqué might be a bit more accurate actually...
Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
You need to quit while you're behind. Pretty much all your post is not accurate.
Just post one point that's inaccurate. Pick one.
Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
Rando guy is wrong on the Internet... oh well...
You can't come up with a point.
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
No it isn't. They are less effective at preventing infection but still effective at preventing severe illness/death.
I don't know how it is in other countries but in the UK there is far more resentment about unvaccinated people occupying hospital beds than there is about anything else.
flanker2000fr
Hall of Fame
Have your parents not cut your wifi yet and sent you to bed?
The Fedfather
Legend
Yep. Sometimes irrational fears and beliefs just have to be 'broken through' by circumstances, because the person isn't capable of letting those go otherwise.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
I just told you virtually all of it from start to finish and I've gone through all of it multiple times on here. To start :
"What happened was that Djokovic claimed to have recorded a positive Covid test, a claim not disputed by the Australian authorities. He then applied through the official channels to play the Australian Open and was granted permission to play. "
WRONG: Mr. Djokovic, had an application under way for weeks before testing positive. In fact, he tested positive at virtually the latest date possible and was deliberately consulting an agency which did not govern the border. He was contemplating an exemption expressly forbidden by the federal agency responsible for the matter, which had informed TA of this twice by letter and the relevant federal agents were available to be contacted by written inquiry by any of the lawyers from Mr. Djokovic's team should they have so desired (standard operating procedure for even a legal intern much less competent attorneys).
"He also received a visa to enter Australia from the national government of Australia. As the 9 time champion aiming to participate in the largest single event held in Australia each year, Djokovic would reasonably have expected he had the right to enter the country."
WRONG: for your visa to actually provide you with the right of entry, you need to provide the supporting documentation at the border and comply with all requirements. The requirements were published and did not include a positive covid test as an exemption. As mentioned above, the federal agency responsible for the matter had also informed TA of this and could easily be contacted by written inquiry in the event of doubt. It is no bar to the requirements to posit that an unrelated agency may have seemed to suggest something different.
As the judge at the initial hearing exclaimed: "What more could this man have done." Subsequently Djokovic lost a court case not on the merits of any argument related to him, but on whether or not the Minister had acted within his powers in ordering his expulsion. The above summary is what happened.
The judge you are referencing was adjudicating a matter of procedure which regarded the time allotted to Mr. Djokovic in the interview process. It did not provide in the least a judgement on the merits of his claim to an exemption. This was stated by both the minister himself and Djokovic's own counsel in the subsequent legal action which you can find starting at 1:04 in that hearing.
Last edited:
All I've done is ask two people who say that I've posted an untrue version of events to say what about my post was false. It's nothing to do with anyone's bedtime. It's about people backing up (or being incapable of backing up) what they say.
so, i was bored for 5 mins - lets go with this one.
please do let us know what are your understandings around applying, and the receiving an "appropriate" visa, for the purpose of a non-Aussie, playing a sporting event. Thanks.
flanker2000fr
Hall of Fame
I just hate it when kids throw a tantrum. It's such an embarrassment for their parents.
Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
Thanks for writing that. Some of it is true, and some of it is half truths. Regarding the timing of Djokovic's positive test. It may have been a false positive of convenience, or it may have been a true positive. Neither of us is in a position to know. The Australian government didn't contest it.
Regarding border entry the Australian government had multiple conflicting positions. One of their positions was that a positive Covid test wouldn't be grounds for admission. That was expressed to TA and not to my knowledge to Djokovic. They also stated they would be honouring the Victorian process for eligibility to enter as they had for the past 2 years. Djokovic past the Victorian process but the federal government reneged on that policy.
Regarding "What more could this man have done" the legal judgment which he ended up not being required to give would have related to border procedure. But that particular statement related to the lengths to which Djokovic had gone to comply with the process to enter Australia.
flanker2000fr
Hall of Fame
Can I ask to be paid in goats (the animals, not the legends) and virgins, like
D-Lite
Hall of Fame
I was thinking this - Djokovic lives in Monaco. Does anyone who lives in France/Monaco know that if say you live in either, can you just drive into the other without checks/the requirement to isolate? I imagine he will just isolate/complete tests on the required dates upon entry to the country.
As you also say, come Spring things may be more relaxed once this Omicron wave has passed which would possibly be reflected in Europe's approach to mandatory vaccines/quarantines.
Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
Living in Monaco is exactly like living in France, only that you're above the law. Hope this helps.
You make the application and they either grant or deny you the visa. Although they're not really issuing a visa. They're collecting a fee, and doing the work that would ordinarily be involved in issuing visas subsequently at the airport. What should happen is that if the facts as they relate to an individual don't change between the time of visa ratification and presentation at the border, the person shouldn't be denied entry. Instead they're issuing a meaningless piece of paper and telling people take your chances at the airport.
D-Lite
Hall of Fame
So what's all the hurrah about whether he will or won't play RG? Presumably he has Monacan residency/citizenship...
Residency, maybe not citizenship?
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Look at your sentence:
"What happened was that Djokovic claimed to have recorded a positive Covid test, a claim not disputed by the Australian authorities. He then applied through the official channels to play the Australian Open and was granted permission to play. "
WRONG: Notice that Mr. Djokovic did not record a positive test and THEN begin his application but rather his application was well underway by the time he tested positive. That negates your entire timeline. At no point did I suggest that the results were inaccurate nor is it necessary for the point I make in the slightest (though certainly the suspicion may remain in many people's minds).
"Regarding border entry the Australian government had multiple conflicting positions. "
WRONG: There is a federal agency which governs the border. TA or any other entity which may consult with Mr. Djokovic does not govern. TA is not nor has it EVER been the official organ which governs this matter and this would be well understood by even a legal intern much less a competent attorney familiar with administrative law. In the event of doubt, one consults with the governing federal agency, preferably in writing. This was not undertaken by Mr. Djokovic's team.
"Regarding "What more could this man have done" the legal judgment which he ended up not being required to give would have related to border procedure. But that particular statement related to the lengths to which Djokovic had gone to comply with the process to enter Australia."
WRONG: This is entirely limited to that judge's views on the interview process, particularly as regards timing. It does not regard the merits of any possible exemption but rather a procedural matter. This is expressly noted in the video of the subsequent hearing at 1:04 by both the minister through his representative and acknowledged by Mr. Djokovic's counsel as well.
D-Lite
Hall of Fame
Yeah, you're right. Surely this gives him adequate right to be in Monaco and then to enter France having 'quarantined' in Monaco. I'm not sure whether travelling to Madrid/Rome would complicate things. It seems you have to quarantine for 10 days in France if you're unvaccinated.
from what i have gathered - it is about having vaccine certificate to entre into all (sporting) public areas, and it applies to all (citizens/locals/foreigners) participants and spectators.
therefore whether he is a citizen or a holder of a residency permit shouldn't be an argument here..
flanker2000fr
Hall of Fame
You really need to look at a map - Monaco is a tiny speck on the French coastline (<4km long / 1km at its widest point) and there is no border check as they are both part of the Shengen area. You literally have some streets split between the two countries.
Now, I don't know what the vaccine requirements are in Monaco, and whether they make their health pass to align with the French one. What I do know, is that once the French legislation passes the Conseil Constitutionnel's review in a few days' time, it will be mandatory for anyone to be double jabbed for virtually any public activity (restaurant, sports clubs, gyms, entertainment etc.). So if Djokovic wants to do anything at all in France in his daily life (which I assume he currently does routinely, seeing how tiny Monaco is), he'll have to get jabbed. Or relocate to a country with much laxer rules.
Last edited:
Your arguments are fine but mainly straw men. Most of them are prefixed with WRONG and then refer to arguments that I haven't put. For example I didn't contend that Tennis Australia had a role in Australian border entry. What I contend is that the Prime Minister of Australia said that the federal government had for two years been complying with Victorian rulings on border entry(because the states had been running the quarantine system), and that policy would continue for the Australian Open. They reneged on that position.
guanzishou
G.O.A.T.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
As the minister of sport Roxana Maracineanu stated: "Le passe vaccinal a été adopté. Dès que la loi sera promulguée, il deviendra obligatoire...pour l’ensemble des spectateurs, des pratiquants, des professionnels français ou étrangers"
The relevant piece of the text translates to this:
"The vaccine passport has been adopted. As soon as the law is officially announced, the vaccine passport will be required for all spectators and participants themselves, be they French or foreign"
So whether Djokovic is a resident of Monaco or was born and bred in the f-cking Seine, it doesn't matter.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
You're writing something absolutely incoherent. I just went through your writing proposition by proposition and tore it to shreds and I'll do it again.
"Regarding border entry the Australian government had multiple conflicting positions. "
You're telling me now that TA didn't have a role in border entry according to you? Fine, then it's even more clear; the agency which does govern and which no one disputed governs should be contacted and one should comply with its requirements.
Djokovic's team did not do that. There is no 'reneging' on a position. In the event of doubt, you contact the governing agency. Rules and regulations must be published and supported in writing. This is a basic principle. So basic in fact that if you're denying this, you're basically telling me you've never even opened a textbook on administrative law much less examined actual cases.
All Djokovic would have needed would be a simple letter from the federal agency governing the border stating what it is that his team suggests that they understood as an exemption.
Ask yourself why they did not do this. Even a legal intern would have known to do this.
Kawasaki Kanagawa
Professional
Interesting to compare with what she said last week.
Minister to Djokovic: You can play at French Open
Tennis world No. 1 Novak Djokovic will be allowed to play in the French Open later this year even if he is not vaccinated against COVID-19, France's sports minister said on Friday.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Interesting to compare with what she said last week.
Minister to Djokovic: You can play at French Open
Tennis world No. 1 Novak Djokovic will be allowed to play in the French Open later this year even if he is not vaccinated against COVID-19, France's sports minister said on Friday.www.espn.com
Like I mentioned somewhere in this insane asylum earlier, when she made those comments, there was set in motion a process by which she was basically reprimanded and brought back into line. There was some discussion of it in the French press and this latest 'rectification' has been expected for days.
- Status
Similar threads
