[Other Sport] Djokovic held at airport

[Uh_huh_him]

The tests are self validated. You can declare any result you like.

OK agreed that is a flaw in the process, but it is equally true that vaccinated people can pass on the virus unknowingly.
My argument is particularly aimed at the concept that unvaccinated = big risk of spreading the virus, vs vaccinated = no risk. Which is inferred continually.
It isn't true,

 

[sydney]

As I have said before, I am pro vax but also pro personal choice.

I cannot disprove the quote above, and you cannot prove it, but I will call it as I see it………….absolute Ball Crap.

and you , like the rest of em , can go finger yerself or fist as you prefer.......the 3 people who i knew in W.A ...? their families were urged not to " make a fuss".

 

[Bold Seagull]

Why?

If everyone has tested negative (genuinely) why is being double vaxxed better?
Surely it's irrelevant?

I understand that being vaccinated helps slow the spread and I'm fully behind it.
But from what I've heard, increasingly being double vaccinated is becoming the only requirement for access to countries/ social events etc.

Discriminating against people who have made a choice not to ( for whatever reason),but can prove they pose no risk, is wrong, in my book.
Preventing people who have proven they pose no risk, from travelling/competing/going to restaurants/football matches.
Whilst allowing people who could pose a risk, but have followed the rules?

I suspect it works out cheaper for the government, in the long run.
But making the argument that it's safer to only allow vaccinated people to travel, rather than insisting on a negative test?
It just isn't a logical approach.

So you can be -ve in the morning and be contagious by the afternoon. However, a vaccine helps to prevent you becoming contagious in many cases, and if you do it’s for a shorter period where you’re likely to be less contagious. Therefore a room or plane full of people vaccinated as well as -ve tests is by statistics a safer scenario than a room of people only with a -ve test result.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

So you can be -ve in the morning and be contagious by the afternoon. However, a vaccine helps to prevent you becoming contagious in many cases, and if you do it’s for a shorter period where you’re likely to be less contagious. Therefore a room or plane full of people vaccinated as well as -ve tests is by statistics a safer scenario than a room of people only with a -ve test result.

Yeah that makes sense. I agree with that.
But a genuine negative test still trumps proof of vaccination, in the stop the spread stakes.
Which is why I find it odd that countries are refusing entry to non-vaccinated people.
Surely it would be better to insist on a negative test before travel?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

ah well you see i reckon if you don't have the vax then you don't get a bed......harsh but fair.

Even though the vaccine killed six of your mates ? Seems very harsh.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yeah that makes sense. I agree with that.
But a genuine negative test still trumps proof of vaccination, in the stop the spread stakes.
Which is why I find it odd that countries are refusing entry to non-vaccinated people.
Surely it would be better to insist on a negative test before travel?

A negative test is only proof of a moment in time. A vaccination is proof that you have an increased chance of resisting the virus and not becoming contagious at all. Not in all cases, but a significant percentage.

Depending on overall strategy, I can see why a country would prefer vaccination status over negative test result if it was making a choice, however both would seem the more secure way to go.

 

[zefarelly]

Aus has a rule saying no vax no entry ( sensible one imo but other rules and opinions are available, along the same lines as believing in mythical people in the sky)

Djokovic is an anti vaxer.

So a simple one line letter along the lines of

Dear Djoko

Rack off

Aus.


Why is it such a big deal? As someone said many posts ago ( can't find to quote). Being an idiot is fine, but thinking you can be above everyone else because you're rich/famous or good at playing with balls is no excuse.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Wait till you find out how many yellow fever / tetanus etc vaccines I've had in my life time

I've had the rabies jab and that really hurts - never again !

 

[Seasider78]

So his defence is that he has had covid so does not need the vaccine.

Well if that’s the defence I am with the Aussies on this one as nobody else can travel into Australia on those terms so why should a sportsperson have different rules.

https://twitter.com/skysportsnews/status/1479730484343185408?s=21

 

[zefarelly]

I've had the rabies jab and that really hurts - never again !

There used to be scary signs at the entrance to Shoreham harbour when we were kids, dogs foaming at the mouth etc

Now its just a few locals frothing.

 

[sydney]

Even though the vaccine killed six of your mates ? Seems very harsh.

make your mind up ....they weren't all mates , 2 of them were and one in particular was like a brother to me , fit as a fiddle although a heavy smoker he walked long walks with his dog every day and ate very well. These deaths took place in the early days when AZ became available but the clotting issues were not made public ........go figure that numerous politicians had recently loaded up on the shares, i took the pfizer jabs and having done my research if i am forced to have a booster to keep working , having a social life in pubs and restaurants and being allowed in shopping centres then i will probably take the Moderna as according to Harvard the Pfizer Pfizer Moderna sequence offers 0ver 90% efficacy ......if it does or not i have no idea .......you can't moan about bed blockers and then have a dig at me for voicing my opinions , thats a tad hypocritical don't you think..?

 

[Rodney Thomas]

Yeah that makes sense. I agree with that.
But a genuine negative test still trumps proof of vaccination, in the stop the spread stakes.
Which is why I find it odd that countries are refusing entry to non-vaccinated people.
Surely it would be better to insist on a negative test before travel?

Because they are also less likely to take a hospital place from a local? I dont necessarily agree with it but one could argue that.

 

[dazzer6666]

Yeah that makes sense. I agree with that.
But a genuine negative test still trumps proof of vaccination, in the stop the spread stakes.
Which is why I find it odd that countries are refusing entry to non-vaccinated people.
Surely it would be better to insist on a negative test before travel?

Should ideally be both…….negative test to help prevent spread, vaccine to help prevent any drain on health services.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Yeah that makes sense. I agree with that.
But a genuine negative test still trumps proof of vaccination, in the stop the spread stakes.
Which is why I find it odd that countries are refusing entry to non-vaccinated people.
Surely it would be better to insist on a negative test before travel?

Agreed. I've been double jabbed but I'm very uncomfortable about society being split into "you're vaccinated so carry on, you're not so you can't do x".. What you put into your own body is YOUR choice. It shouldn't then inhibit what you can do based on that choice. We've never had enforced medication in this country and nor should we. It's what makes the Austria decision disgusting to me - or indeed the directive that all frontline NHS staff must have it. If you can prove you're not infected that should be enough.

Lets remember these vaccines have been rushed through the system - it usually takes years to get them through but this time months. While I don't agree with the anti's I can see their viewpoint.

Mrs WS was reluctant to take the jabs but felt forced to do so because of the threat of COVID passports - that's enforced vaccination via the back door.

 

[Hugo Rune]

So his defence is that he has had covid so does not need the vaccine.

Well if that’s the defence I am with the Aussies on this one as nobody else can travel into Australia on those terms so why should a sportsperson have different rules.

https://twitter.com/skysportsnews/status/1479730484343185408?s=21

That was always the case, the problem is, he obtained the permission to enter the state of Victoria from the state of Victoria and permission to participate in the Open from the LTA.

The issue is between the federal government and the state of Victoria, who has ultimate power in deciding who enters Victoria state? If it’s the federal government, the Serb would need to be fully vaccinated so the fact he had Covid-19 in the last 6 months would not be relevant.

I feel sympathy for the Serb as he was apparently given a visa by the state of Victoria to travel into their state due to him being infected with Covid-19 in the last 6 months. Who is in charge in that Country? Bonkers!

 

[Randy McNob]

so it turns out he tested positive on 16 Dec so wouldn't have been able to get vaccinated

Why that wasn't clear from the start is anyones guess, something a miss

 

[Gazwag]

So it's the good old Trump defence, you cant prove I didn't have covid excuse

 

[Seasider78]

That was always the case, the problem is, he obtained the permission to enter the state of Victoria from the state of Victoria and permission to participate in the Open from the LTA.

The issue is between the federal government and the state of Victoria, who has ultimate power in deciding who enters Victoria state? If it’s the federal government, the Serb would need to be fully vaccinated so the fact he had Covid-19 in the last 6 months would not be relevant.

I feel sympathy for the Serb as he was apparently given a visa by the state of Victoria to travel into their state due to him being infected with Covid-19 in the last 6 months. Who is in charge in that Country? Bonkers!

Agree the issue is not with the player but as it is the border force who enforce the federal laws for entering Australia I would say the rejection decision will be upheld. The issue here appears to be Victoria and the Australian Tennis Association advising players and issuing permission that is not in line with federal government. The government have also shared the letters they sent in November stating that having covid would not be a valid exception.

It would be astonishing if state or tennis association decisions overturned federal laws but that is what the judge will be deciding on Monday.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

That was always the case, the problem is, he obtained the permission to enter the state of Victoria from the state of Victoria and permission to participate in the Open from the LTA.

The issue is between the federal government and the state of Victoria, who has ultimate power in deciding who enters Victoria state? If it’s the federal government, the Serb would need to be fully vaccinated so the fact he had Covid-19 in the last 6 months would not be relevant.

I feel sympathy for the Serb as he was apparently given a visa by the state of Victoria to travel into their state due to him being infected with Covid-19 in the last 6 months. Who is in charge in that Country? Bonkers!

His permission to enter Victoria is valid if he is already in Australia - for instance if he was travelling from South Australia. He doesn't actually have permission to cross the international border into Australia.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Agreed. I've been double jabbed but I'm very uncomfortable about society being split into "you're vaccinated so carry on, you're not so you can't do x".. What you put into your own body is YOUR choice. It shouldn't then inhibit what you can do based on that choice.

You are 100% correct in asserting that it’s an individual’s choice what they put in their body. Everyone has the right to not get a jab and I find compulsory vaccinations (in places such as Austria) very concerning.

However, it should ABSOLUTELY inhibit your right to do what you want. It always has. I’ve traveled to various countries (sometimes with my dogs) and we’ve had to have the correct jabs to travel. You simply can’t expect to do whatever you want if you go against the society norm. The vaccines have been proved overwhelmingly safe and effective by scientists the world over.

Fair enough, don’t get the jab but don’t assume you’ll have the same freedoms to breathe your Covid breathe over vulnerable people whenever and wherever you like. In a democratic society, freedom comes with responsibility, protecting the vulnerable by getting yourself jabbed is the choice of someone who cares about society, friends and family and the welfare of their country as a whole.