Djokovic’s Melbourne martyrdom threatens global health

A spectator touches a banner of 2021 Men's Australian Open winner Novak Djokovic as police officers look on during day one of the 2022 Australian Open at Melbourne Park.

With the dispute finally over and Novak Djokovic safely boarded on to a flight out of Australia, the issue now is about his long-term impact on world health.

That does seem an extraordinary sentence to write about a tennis player but it was kind of the case when he arrived in Australia and it is certainly the case now that he has left. Again, that is an extraordinary weight of responsibility on a man who just wanted to win a tennis tournament, but with fame and an influence such as his there comes great social responsibility. That is where Djokovic failed.

Quite quickly after his arrival in Melbourne 12 days ago, he became less a tennis story and more a Covid story. It was less about whether he could win a 21st grand-slam singles title and more about whether he could mount an argument to beat Australia’s Covid legislation.

He lost that. The greater impact of his bizarre sojourn in the Victorian capital has yet to be completely felt and is pretty much impossible to assess accurately.

By strutting so prominently on the world stage these past two weeks, has Djokovic empowered the anti-vaccination movement more than he has weakened it? He has been portrayed as a hero and a martyr, and a poster boy for freedom of choice.

Armies of social media groups have hailed him as some great modern evangelist. To those in this movement, their anti-vaccination stance has hardened. His Australian experience makes it even less likely that they would reconsider their position.

One question now is whether Novak Djokovic reconsiders getting a Covid vaccine.

I wonder, though, how many have watched this and gone the other way. It has been common to say of antivaxers that if they haven’t been persuaded yet, then they never will. That cannot be universally true.

Have they seen the strength of opposition that Djokovic provoked and thought again? Has it demonstrated how hard it is to operate in the modern world without being double-vaccinated? Have they been persuaded that even if you are not convinced by the science, social responsibility should be part of your decision too?

My guess is that Djokovic has probably been bad for global health, that his Melbourne martyrdom has carried too many people with him. Is it a coincidence that in his native Serbia, where he is a national hero beyond compare, it is estimated that less than half the population is double-vaccinated?

And how is that likely to change when you have the Serbian president, Aleksandar Vucic, announcing publicly: “I told him I can’t wait for him to come home to his country where he is always welcome.” Was it really impossible for said president to append that it would be great if Djokovic got himself vaccinated too?

One question now is whether Djokovic reconsiders. He is hell-bent on that 21st grand-slam and he would have a greater chance of achieving that if he were vaccinated. Under present legislation, he won’t be allowed to compete in the big tournaments in the United States in March. What if a non-vaccinated player has to quarantine before entering France and England for Roland Garros and Wimbledon this summer?

Members of the local Serbian community hold flags and banners outside a government detention centre where Serbia's tennis champion Novak Djokovic was staying in Melbourne during his battle to remain in Australia.

Would his tennis ambition then override his stance on vaccination? And if it did - if he did decide to be vaccinated - would that about-turn then influence other non-vaxers to think again too?

Djokovic carries vast influence on the world stage as we continue the fight against the pandemic. He can make decisions that influence untold numbers of lives, and not for the timing of his backhand or the durability of the battle that he takes to the court.

That is a huge responsibility which is why he is such a threat when he shoulders it so dangerously.

THE TIMES