Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1443936
13 maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 19 JANUARY 2022 OPINION Daryl Adair Daryl Adair Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology Sydney AFTER a convoluted and shambolic visa approval process, followed by questions about his movements over the past month and the information provided to Australian border officials, Immigration Minister Alex Hawke has cancelled Novak Djokovic's visa. The decision is a major blow to Djokovic, who is tied with Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal at 20 Grand Slam singles titles, the most ever by a male player. While his law- yers will attempt to challenge the latest visa cancellation, Djokovic is unlikely to chase history at his most successful Grand Slam tournament. The decision is also a blow to the Austral- ian Open. With Federer out with injury, Djokovic and Nadal were the prime draw cards in this year's men's tournament. If the top-ranked Serbian player and nine-time Australian Open champion is deported, some have feared serious repercussions for the longevity of the event. While the Australian Open's reputation certainly has taken a hit, its status as one of the four Grand Slam tournaments has plenty of support. The longer-term damage might be to Djokovic's legacy. Given the extraordinary backstory to his medical exemption from COVID vacci- nation to enter Australia – along with the many questions that have arisen about his COVID infection in December – public opinion about him has swayed back and forth on a daily basis. Courtside drama Djokovic has long been a polarising fig- ure in tennis. Despite his athleticism, en- durance and mental toughness, he has sometimes been accused of gamesman- ship, "exaggerating" injuries to allow for medical pauses when an opponent has the momentum. Like other players, Djokovic has also ex- hibited unruly behaviour on court, with occasional racket smashes, as well as dis- qualification from the 2020 US Open after recklessly – albeit accidentally – smashing a ball into a line judge. Compared with the much-loved Feder- er and Nadal, Djokovic has a narrower fan base. At the Australian Open, he's always had the effervescent support of Melbourne's large Serbian diaspora, with their patriotic singing and flag-waving. But the mood of the rest of the crowd this year would likely have been mixed, with some undoubtedly voicing their hostility. Indeed, local tennis fans would have good reason to chafe at Djokovic's medical ex- emption from immunisation given the stringent COVID protocols they must fol- low to attend the Australian Open. The tournament requires fans to be dou- ble-vaccinated or provide evidence of a medical exemption. However, unlike Djok- ovic's peculiar defence, prior COVID status does not absolve local residents from the need to be double-vaccinated, with "previ- ous infection" no basis for an exemption. Grand slammed? Further complicating Djokovic's legacy is the question of whether he'll now face visa difficulties at the other tennis majors. The rapid spread of the Omicron variant may alter the rules for unvaccinated players in different countries and tournaments. As things stand, Djokovic appears to face no vaccine-related impediment to compet- ing at the French Open in a few months. The French sports minister has said Djok- ovic "would be able to take part", although unlike vaccinated players he would need to follow "health bubble" protocols. French President Emmanuel Macron, however, has made headlines by declaring he wants to "piss off" the unvaccinated – in part by mandating a "health pass" for pub- lic venues, a requirement for which is to be vaccinated. Whether Macron insists on changes for competitors at Roland-Garros remains to be seen. As far as Wimbledon is concerned, unvac- cinated international arrivals to the United Kingdom are currently required to take repeat COVID tests over several days, plus quarantine for ten days at a residence of their choice. The US Open seems less certain. The un- vaccinated are not permitted in specific in- door venues in New York without a medical exemption. So, if one of Djokovic's matches on the showcourts at the US Open was affected by rain and the roof needed to be closed, it is not clear what organisers would do. He might be forced to forfeit the match. The Djokovic legacy Given Djokovic has been less prone to in- jury than Federer or Nadal and is coming off one of his best years on tour, he is still likely to retire with the most men's grand slam titles. If so, he can rightfully be feted as the greatest male tennis star of all time. But how he will be remembered is a more complicated question. In one sense, Djok- ovic appears to revel in being depicted as the "arch-nemesis" of Federer and Nadal – it has fuelled his desire to surpass their grand slam title hauls. Yet, for all his tennis greatness, Djokovic often attracts eye-rolling outside the court – not simply in relation to his views on vaccines, but the wider pseudo-scientific ruminations that underpin his public pro- nouncements. As the Australian tennis player Nick Kyrgios has put it, Djokovic seems "a very strange cat". The drama from the past week will have an effect on the way others view him, too. It will inflame his supporters, infuriate his detractors, and prompt even neutral ob- servers to take a stand in respect to his en- try to Australia. When it comes to Novak Djokovic, everyone will now surely have an opinion. Novak Djokovic has long divided opinion. Now, his legacy will be complicated even further of this sudden contrast between those two (equally 'classic') photographs? Are we to understand that the same Roberta Metsola who had so abruptly cut short Joseph Muscat's conciliatory advances, with a simple gesture of her hand… is now using the exact the same body-lan- guage, to tell us all that… … ah, but Robert Abela is NOT such a 'continuation of the Joseph Muscat administration' after all, is he? Because let's face it: how else are we supposed to interpret, what was very clearly – and very embarrassingly – a 'publicity stunt', to which both those politicians must have been voluntary participants? It must have been intended for a pur- pose, you know… and if the purpose wasn't to imitate a Disney movie, or to engage in a spot of random ballroom dancing… what was it, then? To my mind, it can only mean one thing, really. That it is now in BOTH their interests to play the same 'sug- ar-coated', 'cute-and-cuddly', 'stick- your-fingers-down-your-throat' sort of game: Roberta Metsola, for the (rather obvious) reason that she found herself actually needing the support of the Eu- ropean Socialists, for a change… and Robert Abela… Well, probably because he knows full- well that Metsola can now inflict FAR more damage to his own government, in her new position, than she ever could as a simple MEP. And besides… it is obviously going to be in his own interest, to play along with a farcical charade that also (as it hap- pens) paints himself as 'one of the good guys', for a change. Yes, indeed: small wonder Robert Ab- ela would be positively beaming, from ear to ear. For he knows, just as well as I do – and just as well as Bernard Grech does, no doubt – that Metsola's public 'endorsement' last Tuesday, is also the direct equivalent of an 'Ego Te Absol- vo'… (and this time, coming from the new EP President, no less!) But no matter WHY both Robert and Roberta engaged in this 'two steps for- ward, three steps back' sort of rhythmic dance; fact remains that it is exactly the same pattern of 'advance/retreat' – or 'attraction/repulsion' - that we've al- ready just covered in our little Tango lesson, above. So tell you what: let's take it all over from the beginning, shall we? On the count of three, now: Ready? One, two… 'Rum… tum-tum-tum…. Tra-la-la-la- la!' [Repeat to fade]… Without getting vaccinated, Djokovic's return to the US Open is far from certain