Should Novak Djokovic be allowed back for the Australian Open? Tennis fans are divided

Novak Djokovic’s chances of competing in this year’s Australian Open remain in jeopardy despite the travel ban on people without the Covid vaccines being abolished, and the government is urged to prevent him from returning to the country.

Djokovic was deported from Australia on the eve of this year’s Australian Open, with the government ruling that his medical exemption from the vaccine was invalid and his visa was canceled because unvaccinated people were not allowed to enter Australia at the time.

That requirement has since been dropped, but Djokovic was deported, leading to another three-year ban on Australia.

Former Home Secretary Karen Andrews – who was a key figure in imposing the ban – said the new government must abide by it and not reconsider its case.

“It would be a slap in the face for those people in Australia who did the right thing… if Novak Djokovic were suddenly allowed back into the country, simply because he is a high-ranking multi-million dollar tennis player,” she told the newspaper. … ABC.

Supporters outside the quarantine facility of the Park hotel where Djokovic was held in Melbourne ahead of the 2022 Australian Open

Tennis Australia boss Craig Tiley said last week that Djokovic was keen to return to Australia for the Open in January and that the final decision on whether or not to lift his three-year suspension was in the hands of the new federal government.

“I know he would like to return to the AO,” Tiley said.

“He is the nine-time champion and of course we always want the best players in the world to participate.

“It’s a matter between him and the appropriate federal authorities.”

Djokovic is leaving the Park Hotel this year ahead of his government hearing ahead of his deportation and ban from the country

Shadow Home Secretary Karen Andrews believes undoing Djokovic’s ban would be a ‘slap in the face’ for Australians who did the right thing

Ms Andrews said reversing the decision would send the wrong message to Australians who had sacrificed and done the right thing during the Covid pandemic.

“If immigration now chooses to make a special announcement for Novak Djokovic, the obvious question is what will you do about someone else in similar circumstances?” Mrs. Andrews told the ABC.

“I don’t think there’s any reason to nullify it simply because someone has a lot of money.

“So the government should clearly look at anyone else in these circumstances who would have had a visa cancellation and see if they should be allowed into the country as well. It shouldn’t be one rule for Novak Djokovic and another rule for everyone else who isn’t worth millions.’

Tennis Australia CEO Craig Tilley says Djokovic wants to return to Australia to compete

Tennis fans were divided over the potential backflip on the 21-time grand slam winner.

‘Why a slap in the face? For the Djoka or for Australia? His choices, his consequence. He knows. Have to face his own music and he is not special. He’s just a tennis player. No shortcuts or reversing… no favors except to everyone, but it’s not up to me, it’s up to Australia and its people,” said one fan to Williams’ comments.

“People played by the rules and weren’t with their loved ones when they died. And to allow someone because they can play tennis and lie to the government to enter the country would be a betrayal and a middle finger to the Australian people. Time heals, but don’t forget,” wrote another.

Other tennis fans feel it is time to move on and allow Djokovic to return to Australia.

‘Time to move on. I work with guys who didn’t get it. If Australians can all go back to work, why can’t he?’ asked a tennis fan.

Others praised Djokovic for being steadfast in the vaccination mandates and refusing the shot.

‘Well done Nova. You are the ultimate champion, more glorious than 100 Wimbledon champions because you stand up for your sovereign right to make the best choice for your life. Bravo,’

A spokeswoman for immigration minister Andrew Giles said the government would not comment on individual cases for privacy reasons.