Tennis 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
Berbasbullet said:
Put a cheeky bet on Murray to win from a set down since that is basically peak Murray.
Click to expand...
He should definitely benefit from not only an extra days rest, but the fact that he only had to play one set in the semi.

Great move there from Karatsev, though!
 
Yagami said:
He should definitely benefit from not only an extra days rest, but the fact that he only had to play one set in the semi.

Great move there from Karatsev, though!
Click to expand...
Yeah can see already Karatsev is a good player, really hope Murray can make it a contest.
 
Before this week, I don’t think there was a player’s story I believed less than Karatsev’s.
 
Brophs said:
Nah, it’s just the sort of sentence lawyers include. Djokovic won’t have had any input.
Click to expand...
True. But do you think that means they’re just throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks?
 
Some of these shots from Karatsev... Blimey!

Loving the fight from Murray
 
Impressed by Aslan.

Disappointed for Murray, but it's just nice to see him playing again.
 
Murray is a gentleman. I hope he gets back to a decent form and wins something this year.
 
I'd be pretty surprised at this stage not to wake up to hear Djokovic has won his appeal and will be playing on Monday.
 
Brophs said:
I'd be pretty surprised at this stage not to wake up to hear Djokovic has won his appeal and will be playing on Monday.
Click to expand...
What’s that based on? I thought you have very little chance against a ministers discretion?
 
Pexbo said:
What’s that based on? I thought you have very little chance against a ministers discretion?
Click to expand...
Honestly, mostly just gut feeling. Minsterial discretion is rarely unfettered in the way that's being suggested in the coverage. I also don't think the court is going to be nearly so swayed by the notion that Djokovic is the bogeyman.
 
Luckily, we are just one day away from the start of the play, and this circus will stop one way or the other. The first round already provides a number of interesting matches.
 
Brophs said:
Honestly, mostly just gut feeling. Minsterial discretion is rarely unfettered in the way that's being suggested in the coverage. I also don't think the court is going to be nearly so swayed by the notion that Djokovic is the bogeyman.
Click to expand...

Not unfettered but rarely overturned as the grounds to do so are very narrow. Djokovic's best chance is a bridging visa that might let him play. Unless the Minister cancels that as well.
 
Brophs said:
Honestly, mostly just gut feeling. Minsterial discretion is rarely unfettered in the way that's being suggested in the coverage. I also don't think the court is going to be nearly so swayed by the notion that Djokovic is the bogeyman.
Click to expand...
I don’t know diddly about Aus law but overturning his decision (opinion) is hard to disprove… whereas saying “you didn’t follow the immigration rules fully” is easier to prove
 
Wibble said:
The Federal government have been useless from day 1. The State governments have been the adults in the room at least until Gladys' corruption caught up with her and we got Domicron.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that, thanks for the info! Since Australia has only 26 million people (California has 40 million) I was expecting that the Federal gov takes all the major decisions and the State governments only decide for minor, local issues. I have never been to Australia and I don't really know how its gov works, I guess I will have to read about it.
 
From what I've read it's all about whether Djokvic has made anti-vax statements and his lawyers saying he hasn't said anything extreme with regards to vaccines, which I think is probably true. No legal expert but I'd be inclined to think Djokovic will win this appeal.

Don't think the government have put forward their case yet though.
 
Rooney24 said:
So is this hearing the absolute end game?
Click to expand...

Who knows. Reasoning behind first cancellation made some sense as it was based on facts and rules. Second cancellation is based on assumptions and "thoughts" Novak has in his mind.
It appears government can cancel visa again, but I am not sure when. Can they do it right away so he can't start the tournament or is the same waiting period.
However you turn it, this is becoming petty now from both sides.
 
frostbite said:
I didn't know that, thanks for the info! Since Australia has only 26 million people (California has 40 million) I was expecting that the Federal gov takes all the major decisions and the State governments only decide for minor, local issues. I have never been to Australia and I don't really know how its gov works, I guess I will have to read about it.
Click to expand...

Partly that many functions occur at state level and partly #scottyfrommarketing being utterly useless. Loves to do nothing and then blame others.
 
ExoduS said:
Who knows. Reasoning behind first cancellation made some sense as it was based on facts and rules. Second cancellation is based on assumptions and "thoughts" Novak has in his mind.
It appears government can cancel visa again, but I am not sure when. Can they do it right away so he can't start the tournament or is the same waiting period.
However you turn it, this is becoming petty now from both sides.
Click to expand...

I think the difference in this hearing is that the burden is for Djokovic to prove that the minister couldn't have reasonably held the view that resulted in cancellation. So quite a high bar given the widespread public view that Djokovic is a danger to us given him being unvaxxed and his behaviour when infected.

Yes they can cancel when they like if they lose. Doesn't mean they will.
 
Wibble said:
I think the difference in this hearing is that the burden is for Djokovic to prove that the minister couldn't have reasonably held the view that resulted in cancellation. So quite a high bar given the widespread public view that Djokovic is a danger to us given him being unvaxxed and his behaviour when infected.

Yes they can cancel when they like if they lose. Doesn't mean they will.
Click to expand...

I got to be honest that I don't understand what what this court case is all about. I mean I know what the outcome is about but how to reach the outcome is a complete mystery to me.
 


Like I'd felt earlier, I'm reasonably sure the ban will be waived if he does get deported. Insisting on a three year ban would seem petty and excessive. I see him being allowed next year unless he's yet not vaccinated and Australia's border policy is as strict as it is now.
 
ExoduS said:
I got to be honest that I don't understand what what this court case is all about. I mean I know what the outcome is about but how to reach the outcome is a complete mystery to me.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there is more nuance to it and most people who get their visas cancelled this way aren't rich celebrities so I guess we will see and maybe learn more about the legal process.
 
wr8_utd said:


Like I'd felt earlier, I'm reasonably sure the ban will be waived if he does get deported. Insisting on a three year ban would seem petty and excessive. I see him being allowed next year unless he's yet not vaccinated and Australia's border policy is as strict as it is now.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure the ban can be waived as it is part of a visa cancellation. It can be waived during the three years if a new visa is requested for a few reasons. All just repeating stuff in the press so no guarantee the info is correct.

I'd also say that the law will be stricter by next year to prevent this happening again.
 
What is the absolute cut off for Novak to be able to still compete in the AO? I'm sure the tournament organisers would move his match back a day or two if they can to enable a big a window as possible, allowing for the proceedings, further appeals etc...
it doesn't sound like today is necessarily the end, certainly if the government loses?
 
Initial decision later today is likely

The Federal Court said:
What we would hope to do is to spend the afternoon hopefully, and perhaps the early evening, dealing with the arguments that have been put to the court, not with a view to delivering full reasons today, but with a view if possible as to reach a view as to the outcome of the matter and on one hypothesis, if it be relevant, Mr Lloyd, the individual basis for it.

We would hope to do that later in the afternoon. So in a sense we’re not asking counsel and solicitors to stand down in their present positions as it were. But we would hope to be in a position to indicate to the parties later in the afternoon what we propose to do.
Click to expand...
 
Jippy said:
What is the absolute cut off for Novak to be able to still compete in the AO? I'm sure the tournament organisers would move his match back a day or two if they can to enable a big a window as possible, allowing for the proceedings, further appeals etc...
it doesn't sound like today is necessarily the end, certainly if the government loses?
Click to expand...

He is scheduled to play at about 8pm tomorrow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.