COVID-19 and Tennis

[HappyFlyerFamily]

Australian Open star says multiple players ‘have Covid’ but aren’t being tested​

One of the favourites to win the Australian Open has made an alarming claim about Covid testing and how many players have the virus.


Alexander Zverev believes there are probably more players with Covid at the Australian Open after 29th seed Ugo Humbert said on Wednesday that he tested positive following his first-round loss.

The 23-year-old Humbert was beaten by fellow Frenchman Richard Gasquet on Tuesday and subsequently wrote on Instagram: “I tested positive on my exit test yesterday and I’ll stay one more week in isolation in Australia.

“Thanks for your support and see you soon.”

Australian Open star says multiple players ‘have Covid’ but aren’t being tested

Alexander Zverev believes there are probably more players with Covid at the Australian Open after 29th seed Ugo Humbert said on Wednesday that he tested positive following his first-round loss.

www.news.com.au

 

[Pushka]

ABC reports:

'We're not getting tested': Zverev concerned more Australian Open players could be COVID positive

German star Alexander Zverev says he has placed himself in his own Australian Open bubble due to concerns about testing procedures and the number of players who could be infected.

www.abc.net.au

On Wednesday, Frenchman Ugo Humbert said he had tested positive following his round one loss to countryman Richard Gasquet.

It's an interesting article and I'd presumed that players were being tested regularly.

 

[Lynda2475]

Is anyone really surprised though?

Covid transmission rates are very high in Melbourne (and most of Australia) right now. Players are out and about dining and celebrating with the general public so being exposed continuously.

A player wanting to ensure they remain covid free until the finals, would be wise to limit movements and mixing with locals in unmasked environments by dining in their room.

It would have been very simple to have players do a RAT upon arrival at the arena each day, and to dispose of the result so it coudlnt be reused.

Of course TA don't really want to know about the positives, hence why there Covid Safe Plan its self RAT and self report. It is not in their interest to do supervised testing as the pool of players will reduce.

Their support for Novak and lack of testing shows they continue to put commercial interests ahead of wellbeing.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

It's an interesting article and I'd presumed that players were being tested regularly.

Testing using an old 'negative' RAT and self-reporting that result..........keeping the new RAT for after the tournament - or taking it home. lol

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

It is rather interesting
- Players do daily RAT and self-report
If pos isolate 10 days in hotel
- players who ‘display symptoms’ will be RAT tested and if pos isolate in their hotel
- players who are contacts (family/close player contact) isolate till neg RAT

What could possibly go wrong?

For info/reference, here is a summary of the AO22 protocols.

 

[drron]

Novax is considering suing the Australian Government.

Djokovic set to sue Australian government for millions

A report claims the eye-watering figure he is suing for includes Australian Open prize money if he had played and won the tournament.

7news.com.au

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

Novax is considering suing the Australian Government.

Djokovic set to sue Australian government for millions

A report claims the eye-watering figure he is suing for includes Australian Open prize money if he had played and won the tournament.

7news.com.au

Given the speculation Tennis Aust funded the legal fees associated with visa saga, this will hurt Djokovic’s hip pocket if he loses.

 

[Pushka]

Novax is considering suing the Australian Government.

Djokovic set to sue Australian government for millions

A report claims the eye-watering figure he is suing for includes Australian Open prize money if he had played and won the tournament.

7news.com.au

Including the millions he would have won in the Tournament

 

[Lynda2475]

Including the millions he would have won in the Tournament

He seems to assume if he played that his winning was assured, yet there are other players in the tournament that have beaten him before and could do so again.

Pathetic, case should be thrown out for lack of merit if he ever actually files it.

 

[DC3]

… suing the Australian Government.

Yes. Bring it on.

 

[Anna]

The 106 para judgment is here:

Djokovic v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCAFC 3

www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au

I'm off to the gym now but I expect a full learned AFF discussion of it by the time I get back

 

[DC3]

“It is not part of the function of the court to decide upon the merits or wisdom of the decision,” Chief Justice Allsop said.

 

[RooFlyer]

“It is not part of the function of the court to decide upon the merits or wisdom of the decision,” Chief Justice Allsop said.

Yes, that was said at the time and is of course correct. They rule on law, not opinion.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Yep suing the Fed Govt would be a clever course of action when you need to come back grovelling in 11mths time to try to gain an exemption to your 3 year exclusion due to Visa cancellation if indeed any merit in this report.

 

[RooFlyer]

A couple of flags early on:

7 Sections 133C(3) and (4) are in the following terms:

(3) The Minister may cancel a visa held by a person if:

(a) the Minister is satisfied that a ground for cancelling the visa under section 116 exists; and

(b) the Minister is satisfied that it would be in the public interest to cancel the visa.

Note: The Minister’s power to cancel a visa under this subsection is subject to section 117 (see subsection (9) of this section).

(4) The rules of natural justice, and the procedures set out in Subdivisions E and F, do not apply to a decision under subsection
...

THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS

18 We have set out ss 116(1)(e)(i) and 133C(3) above. The elements of s 133C(3) should be noted: a power or a discretion to cancel a visa (“may cancel a visa”) held by a person; if the Minister is satisfied that a ground for cancellation under s 116 exists; and (separately and in addition) the Minister is satisfied that it would be in the public interest to cancel the visa.

19 The elements of s 116(1)(e)(i) should be noted. As with ss 133C(3)(a) and (b), the power in s 116 is engaged by or conditioned upon the Minister being satisfied of certain matters, here satisfied of the matters in para (e)(i). Those matters are, relevantly for present purposes, that the presence of the visa holder in Australia is or may be, or might be, a risk to the health, safety or good order of the Australian community or a segment of it.

The state of “satisfaction”

20 Thus it is not the fact of Mr Djokovic being a risk to the health, safety or good order of the Australian community; rather it is whether the Minister was satisfied that his presence is or may be or would or might be such a risk for the purposes of s 116(1)(e)(i), through s 133C(3).

21 The satisfaction of the Minister is not an unreviewable personal state of mind. The law is clear as to what is required. If, upon review by a court, the satisfaction is found to have been reached unreasonably or was not capable of having been reached on proper material or lawful grounds, it will be taken not to be a lawful satisfaction for the purpose of the statute. In such a case the precondition for the exercise of the power will not exist and the decision will be unlawful and will be set aside. That is, the lawful satisfaction is a jurisdictional precondition, a form of jurisdictional fact, for the exercise of the power or discretion: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu [1999] HCA 21; 197 CLR 611 at 651 [131] and the cases cited at footnote 109.

 

[DC3]

… I expect a full learned AFF discussion of it by the time I get back

Perhaps flush out a few of the bush lawyers.

 

[DC3]

Yep suing the Fed Govt would be a clever course of action when you need to come back grovelling in 11mths time to try to gain an exemption to your 3 year exclusion due to Visa cancellation if indeed any merit in this report.

Isn’t there a Feral Election before then (feral?)? That may help.

 

[RooFlyer]

Perhaps flush out a few of the bush lawyers.

I took silk in Bush-Lawyering years ago and I really wondered about what I was reading on the arguments of Djokovic's barristers. I told 'em they're dreaming ...

 

[TheRealTMA]

Well who would have thought!

Darren Saunders, an associate professor of medicine at the University of New South Wales, says the inclusion of “Quant” in the name “is a massive red flag” and the company’s website is a “word salad”.

“Oh dear. I’ve had a quick look at this company,” he tweeted.

“‘Biotech’ might be a stretch. The second red flag is the liberal sprinkling of words like ‘resonant’ and ‘frequencies’ through the word salad on that site.

“Let’s just park the false statement that coronaviruses are retroviruses for now. So, if you haven’t figured it out yet, Novak’s ‘biotech company’ is working on homeopathy as a cure for Covid.

Novak Djokovic’s Covid ‘cure’ company torn to shreds

Scientists have rubbished the Covid “cure” company that unvaccinated tennis star Novak Djokovic and his wife own an 80 per cent share in.

www.news.com.au

 

[VPS]

And the jokes continue