How does tennis deal with the reality that Novak Djokovic, its best player, is very likely an anti-vaxxer?

For the better part of the previous two years, it had been easy to defend Novak Djokovic's stance on vaccination by quoting the cliche 'actions speak louder than words'.

In a 2020 interview, Djokovic openly declared that he was "not against vaccination of any kind", because who was he "to speak about vaccines when there are people that have been in the field of medicine and saving lives around the world?" He then organized a vaccination drive for players at his home tournament in Belgrade. The Serb also refused to get drawn into the pro vs anti vaccine debate, which he believes is a "game" that the media is creating.

Novak Djokovic's actions certainly weren't typical of a hardcore anti-vaxxer, even if he did repeatedly insist that vaccination should never be made mandatory on the ATP tour. As long as that wish of his was granted, nobody would have legal grounds to question his own vaccination status, and everything would be hunky-dory.

But that facade came crashing down the moment it became clear that the Australian Open - Djokovic's most successful Slam - wouldn't allow unvaccinated players to participate. When faced with the choice of either getting vaccinated or skipping his shot at glory in Melbourne, the World No. 1 suddenly became a lot more cagey and defensive about the issue.

"It is a private matter and according to our law, whoever asks you, you can in some way charge him for asking you," Djokovic thundered in October when asked about his vaccination status. "That is an immoderate question."

In the same interview Djokovic also accused the media of spreading "fear" and "panic", and roundly criticized the strict COVID protocols that had been put in place by the Australian Open for the 2021 edition. Most significantly, he claimed that he wasn't sure of playing the Melbourne Slam in 2022 because the situation was "not good at all."

In one way Djokovic was articulating what everyone knew to be true: the situation hasn't been "good" for two whole years. But the worrying part is that the Serb was asking for the restrictions to be loosened rather than tightened, thus potentially making an already bad situation even worse.

As it turns out, the restrictions have been loosened, at least for certain players.

"Today I'm heading Down Under with an exemption permission," Novak Djokovic posted on his social media handles earlier on Tuesday. "Let's go 2022!!"

In other words, Djokovic has confirmed that he isn't vaccinated but is still getting to play the Australian Open. This is in stark contrast to players like Natalia Vikhlyantseva (who can't play because the Sputnik vaccine is not recognized by Australia) and Indian junior Aman Dahiya (who can't play because his country hadn't started vaccination drives for those under 18).

The exact grounds on which Novak Djokovic was given the exemption are unclear. But what we do know is that his application went through a "rigorous" review by two different teams of experts.

If you look at this in isolation, you'd be hard-pressed to find anything wrong with it. Medical exemption from a vaccine is a legitimate thing, and if the experts found Djokovic's application to be above-board then we aren't in a position to question it.

But can anything done by a World No. 1 exist in isolation? More to the point, can anything done by a World No. 1 as expressive as Novak Djokovic be brushed aside as a one-off?

Djokovic's earlier insistence on keeping his vaccination status private had already started creating confusion and panic, the very things he accused the media of manufacturing. A person's vaccination status while the world is in the middle of a pandemic cannot be a "private matter", but the Serb's words convinced many otherwise.

Let me draw a real-life analogy here: imagine you had to attend a career-altering conference, but where nobody disclosed their vaccination status. Would you go to that conference without any fear? And if you refused to go, would you hold yourself responsible for the missed opportunity, or would you put it down to the selfishness of the people in attendance?

Novak Djokovic playing the Australian Open without revealing his vaccination status would've been similarly damaging for everyone at the venue. Fans would be wary of him getting too close during matches, members of the media would be forced to avoid sitting close to him during pressers, and ballkids would only have to close their eyes and pray.

These may sound like minor inconveniences, and some might even suggest that fans and journalists should just stay home if they are so scared. But the fact remains that they wouldn't be scared if they knew that the person they were in close proximity with was vaccinated.

Instead of the unvaccinated being asked to stay away from others, we'd have been effectively asking the vaccinated to forego their rights - and for no fault of their own.

Still, while that would've been an unpleasant situation for everyone, it would've been less harmful than what Novak Djokovic has engineered now.

Novak Djokovic and his silent support

Novak Djokovic at the 2020 Australian Open

Novak Djokovic has never openly opposed vaccines, even if his non-committal comments over the previous two years had aroused suspicion. In fact, many neutral observers (including yours truly) wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, especially since there were plenty of indications that he had been vaccinated.

But recent events are making us question all the excuses and justifications we've been making for him.

To be clear, it is unfair to criticize Djokovic for seeking recourse in an exemption. If he has a valid medical issue, he should certainly be allowed some leeway. What does deserve to be called out, however, is the message he is sending out with his comments.

The Serb could have easily stayed the course and kept mum about his vaccination status, merely announcing that he was traveling to Australia. Although that would've again left room for doubt and confusion, at least it wouldn't have contributed to elongating the pandemic.

But by revealing that he got an exemption, Djokovic has further emboldened the dangerous anti-vaxxer cult that is spreading its tentacles all over the world.

The Serb's post can (and likely will) directly impact the way impressionable people look at vaccines; that's just the power that any role model wields. His words are speaking louder than his actions right now, and it's hard to see how they can lead to anything good.

Is it any surprise that several prominent anti-vaxxers are looking at Djokovic's announcement as a win? Here's a look at some of the tweets that have come out in support of the 34-year-old over the last few hours:

Djokovic is "holding the line", apparently. He is also "refusing to bow down to tyranny". There are many other comments like this flooding social media right now; you don't want to wade into those waters unless you want to be seriously traumatized.

Again, the Serb could have lessened the inevitable toxicity by either continuing to keep his status private or by saying a positive word or two about vaccines. He refused to do either of those things.

Novak Djokovic is the best player in the world right now, and probably the best (male) player in all of history. But his recent comments suggest he is also an anti-vaxxer, or at least a silent supporter of the anti-vaxxer movement. And no amount of Slam titles can cancel that out.

Some argue that being pro- or anti-vaccines is a personal choice, and that a public figure is under no obligation to get jabbed. That argument, I'm sorry to say, has no basis in fact.

All the scientific evidence points to the vaccine being an extremely important tool in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. Anyone who suggests otherwise (and that too without any peer-reviewed findings) is not only being blind and delusional, but also insensitive to the millions of people who have died due to the virus.

Novak Djokovic is not an insensitive man, as we know through his numerous charity drives and kind-hearted gestures. But he is also a man with an affinity for unorthodox lifestyle choices (hello miracle water), so it is not unconceivable that he actually thinks vaccines do more harm than good.

Nobody can say for sure what Djokovic truly thinks about vaccines. Maybe he'll clarify his stance in the future; maybe he'll finally admit one day that the COVID vaccine is crucial in the world's fight against the virus. But until he does that (and it doesn't seem likely that he will), the deniers of science will have unlimited fodder for their conspiracy theories.

The anti-vaxxer cult now has a huge public figure - perhaps the biggest of them all? - it can proudly hold up as an icon of its movement. Its tentacles aren't going to stop spreading any time soon.

Many are blaming the Australian government for granting Djokovic the exemption, with some even alleging corruption by the 'establishment'. (As an aside, how amusing is it that the very establishment that Djokovic's fans have been villainizing for years has now come to his aid?). But as I said above, if he had a valid medical reason to avoid taking the jab, the experts wouldn't have had much of an option.

The tournament organizers (and the ATP), on their part, might have hoped that Djokovic would keep the details of his status private - as he had been doing all along. The Serb's social media post doing the exact opposite undeniably makes them look bad. But they can't regulate what Djokovic - or any player - says to the public; their powerlessness in that regard is nothing new.

How does tennis deal with a scenario where its male GOAT is probably an anti-vaxxer? As things stand right now, the only thing the sport can do is learn to live with it.

That's just the unfortunate reality of our time, unless Novak Djokovic decides he'd rather use his fame for good.

---

Also Check Out: Updated ATP Cup 2022 Results