Now the sport has it officially: its stars can be a danger to the public good.
And that is when his role models do not behave as the government demands and as a majority of the population demands.
The lawyer for the Australian government declared Novak Djokovic to be a risk to the health of Australians in a final hearing before three federal judges last Sunday.
His presence alone made the population aware of his anti-vaccination attitude.
An intolerable prospect for the government.
Football correspondent Europe in Berlin.
Follow I follow
If the authorities hadn't written the screenplay for this drama, but Henrik Ibsen, you wouldn't have to look far for the name of the new title that Djokovic takes with him to his Serbian homeland for his forced departure after several days of deportation from Australia: An Enemy of the People.
A drama unparalleled in sports history.
One that eludes clarity, where the boundaries blur.
Between good and evil, between truth and lies.
It's all about vaccination status
In legal terms, the contradictions in the case sound like this: During the hearing of Djokovic's objection, the Australian judges made it clear in their statement that they only decided whether the repeated withdrawal of the visa by the Immigration Minister was lawful. That's him. Their role, they added, is not to judge the executive's prudence. They provide their reasoning behind the judgment.
The law professor Mary Crock from the University of Sydney, also on behalf of colleagues who deal with immigration laws, described the handling of the Australian authorities before the verdict as a "scandal" which will occupy the country for years to come. In the final procedure, it should be made clear once again that the government's arguments were no longer about misconduct or misrepresentations by Djokovic before or during his request for an exemption. It was all about his status as an unvaccinated person, and thus his attitude, which is linked to it.
One thing is certain: This is exactly why the applause of the majority accompanies Djokovic's expulsion. And not just in Australia. Because of the inconsistencies and twists and turns the case has produced, it is often said that it leaves only losers. But it is evident that in Djokovic, an individual bears the incomparably greater burden, despite only insisting on enforcing his rights against a state that in turn wants to show strength. And who knows that he is in line with the majority opinion.
When it comes to a duel between David and Goliath in sport and in life, it is usually clear where the sympathies lie.
In Djokovic's case, it's the other way around.
But not only there.
In the case of the unvaccinated Joshua Kimmich, one person ended up being pretty much alone last fall, even though he hadn't broken any rules.
Unlike Djokovic, there wasn't even such an accusation in the room.
Questions then arise.
How is it possible that two unvaccinated top athletes of all people are creating an unprecedented vortex in this pandemic, causing such strong rejection and exclusion?
No other person without political decision-making power is likely to have attracted more global attention than Djokovic in the Corona crisis because of a private decision;
not an entrepreneur, not an artist, not a Nobel Prize winner, not a Hollywood star.
Nobody, neither male nor female.
From a German point of view, the same applies to Kimmich, just a few numbers smaller, at national level.Keywords: