Like any good self-respecting soap opera, here is a summary of the previous episodes. World tennis No.1 Novak Djokovic is not vaccinated against Covid-19. Despite everything, the champion receives the green light at the beginning of January from the organizers of the Australian Open to participate in this first Grand Slam tournament of the season, which begins from the 17th of the month, in Melbourne. A place where “Djoko” also holds the record for victories, numbering nine. Where he could also conquer his 21st supreme title, overtaking his two rivals: Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. The Graal.
Problem: Australian authorities are not quite on the same line as the tournament organizers. The country is one of the strictest in the world regarding Covid. The “Nole” visa is canceled the day after his arrival. The Serb is admitted to a detention center – a hotel – while waiting to regularize his situation. His clan provides a positive PCR test dated December 16. However, we notice that Novak Djokovic appeared in public on the 17th, then that he was interviewed by The team the 18. Scandal. The player himself refers to “errors”. At the time when these lines are written, the tennis player is training in the open air, and still hopes to defend his title. But his situation can change from one day to the next. Will play, will not play?
Laurent Binet, award-winning author for his works HHhH, The Seventh Function of Language and Civilizations, co-author of Tennis lovers dictionary (Plon, 2020), delivers to L’Express his impressions of this affair. And he is pessimistic about the near future of the world’s most famous antivax.
Limited offer. 2 months for 1 € without commitment
L’Express: The affair between Djokovic and Australia is a real game with twists and turns. Longer even than the legendary Mahut-Isner of the Wimbledon tournament in 2010 – more than 11 hours of play spread over three days, a record in the matter in this sport. We do not yet know the outcome. But deep down, has he already lost it?
Laurent Binet: Not only has he already lost it, but the problem is now much more important than his arrival, his initial privilege: the rest of his career is at stake. The justification for the positive test in December – which everyone found bizarre, by the way – has generated suspicion. If this test turns out to be falsified, it risks suspension. [par l’ATP, l’association qui gère le circuit professionnel]. The maximum incurred is three years. It would simply be the end of his career. This is the worst case scenario, of course. But this testing story puts him at a stalemate anyway. Even true, she shows a certain degree of irresponsibility, as he leaves to kiss children the day after his positive result. He says he didn’t know it yet, but he still receives reporters the next day. Finally, he loses on all counts. This case is reminiscent, in certain respects, of those concerning the politicians François Fillon and Jérôme Cahuzac. A breach opens, and every day new revelations come out. There is a great lesson to be learned. When we do something stupid, it is better not to try to fix it by hacking. Otherwise, we sink.
Is there another scenario, in which Novak Djokovic comes out with his head held high?
There is a scenario where he would emerge victorious: Australia would allow him to play, he would win, and he would break the Grand Slam title record. It would demonstrate extraordinary mental strength. One of its features. But it was noticed at the last US Open [un autre tournoi du Grand Chelem, aux Etats-Unis], where he was already able to break this record, that his mind had its limits. He lost sharply in three sets, in the final, against his opponent Daniil Medvedev. At the time, in addition, he was rather supported, he even cried in his chair. But here in Melbourne, if he plays, he won’t have public support. I find that his security would even be seriously compromised. The danger would be everywhere given the state of tension in the world today. Finally, there is also the more “funny” scenario: Novak Djokovic is allowed to play, but he tests positive the first week. Just because this assumption exists, the Australian government cannot, in my opinion, take this risk.
In terms of dramaturgy, one has the impression of reaching new heights …
Djokovic is on the verge of being turned away from the tournament where he is the most successful, by far. And where he could achieve the Grail, namely, hold the record for Grand Slam tournament wins. It makes you wonder if God is not Swiss or Spanish [en référence à ses rivaux, le Suisse Roger Federer et l’Espagnol Rafael Nadal, codétenteur du record de titres, à 20 unités]. With these twists and turns, the dramatic structure is incredible, indeed. He is in the role of a tragic hero, in the sense of Greek tragedy. We are in Oedipus king : “No man here on earth has been more excruciatingly crushed than you are going to be.” The more Novak Djokovic struggles, the more he sinks into real quicksand.
“It makes you wonder if God is not Swiss or Spanish”
But what is even more catastrophic for Djokovic is the communication of his clan. His family is doing him a disservice. His father passes him off as a “New World Spartacus”. Bad luck, at the same time, there are cases like Peng Shuai’s, and he himself finds himself staying in a hotel with migrants who have been waiting for years to regain their freedom. He’s just a finicky millionaire.
The public has never been kind to someone who is sometimes referred to as the “unloved”. “Nobody is really for Djokovic, nor really against. So sports journalists, perfectly aware of this lack of passion, have recourse, to interest tennis fans in the Serbian phenomenon, the eternal hook of all sports: statistics “, did you write in 2016, for The team. Then, four years later, you gave it no more praiseworthy entry into your Tennis lovers dictionary, co-written with Antoine Benneteau, in particular on his health beliefs.
In 2016, that was my theory: we didn’t care. There was only one duel that mattered, the dantesque one between Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. I had also made a comparison with the film The good, the bad and the ugly. The Ugly is nice. But in the final duel, he’s the only one who doesn’t have his gun loaded. In the dictionary, when we wrote it, Roger Federer was still leading the Grand Slam victories. So I thought he would end up tied with Rafael Nadal, but I barely mentioned Djokovic in the story. Yet it is an incredible machine. He has an incredible mind. However, he has neither Federer’s grace nor Nadal’s superhuman bestiality.
But today, many find it “false”. Antoine Benneteau (former tennis player, now consultant) says he’s a bit of a “heavy buddy”. We don’t hate him, he wants to be loved, but he’s not doing it well. I don’t like his kisses on the four corners of the courts, at the end of games, for example. It’s okay, but it doesn’t sound good. It’s hard to say why. Someone recently reminded me that at first he didn’t have that role. It was the “Djoker”, the joker. He was making videos that imitated Nadal, Becker, Sampras. It was funny and well done. He stopped. Gradually, he tried to buy himself respectability.
Otherwise, I have effectively dedicated an entry in the dictionary to “Novax Djokovid”. You have to remember that before this Australian Open affair, he had already done anything during the Adria Tour [un tournoi caritatif organisé par le joueur dans les Balkans à l’été 2020], without tests, without distancing and punctuated by an evening in a nightclub. At the time, he caught the Covid and many players too. He says: “With us, Corona is just a beer.” A week later, his tournament was finally canceled.
This episode already betrayed some of his obsessions or sectarian borderline sanitary beliefs. His gluten allergy which did not prevent him from being No. 3 in the world. His rapprochement with the “guru” Pepe Imaz, a Spanish mental trainer renowned for doing his long “hugs” [câlins]. Then, Novak rocked during the pandemic. Himself explaining in videos, during the first confinement, that we could purify water by thought. Meanwhile, his wife was making her first videos linking the vaccine and 5G. All this madness does not deter him, apparently, to excel at his sport. On the contrary. The paths to excellence are impenetrable (laughs).
Have we ever had a world No. 1 in tennis so criticized?
Like that ? No. There was John McEnroe, in the early 1980s, who was a bad kid, yelling at the ref. But that had nothing to do with it. It was a real spectacle that excited the crowds. McEnroe, he’s my absolute idol. I am not sure that Djoko is the idol of children today. Ivan Lendl was not much liked either: the cold air, coming from a country in Eastern Europe, which challenged the supremacy of the Americans … Once again, nothing to see. On the other hand, tennis does not lack a rock’n’roll figure. Daniil Medvedev, who calls out the crowd at the US Open and goes all the way to the final, in 2019. “The more you whistle at me, the more energy you give me,” he told the audience. I am also thinking of Nick Kyrgios, for example, who can be very insulting, and especially towards Djokovic. And there, it’s funny, he spoke to say “let him play”. He almost defended it. But I’m sure his “punk attitude” meant he was forced not to be where we expected him to be.
What do you think of Nadal and Federer’s positions? The first seemed a little wary, before calling to let him play. The second remains silent.
Roger Federer has never taken very shattering positions on any subject. Nadal, even in a form of tongue-in-cheek, on the other hand has said a lot of things, that he has the right to be anti-ax but there are consequences. What Nadal is trying to say, in a sanitized fashion, is quite simply: “Djokovic is a spoiled child and pisses everyone off with his whims.”
Opinions
Chronic
Chronic
Chronic
Chronic
