Aljaz Bedene

theemptyvessel · Club Coach

RE: Aljaz Bedene

RJA · Hall of fame

I'm sorry but people here clearly don't understand what retroactively means or they have misunderstood the time frame of this case. The rule change was announced during 2014 with it coming into effect for the 2015 competition. A clear deadline was given for when players had to be registered with their new country if they wanted to be exempt from this rule and Aljaz didn't meet that deadline. For the rule to apply retroactively it would have to apply to players who had already changed their nationality at the time of the ruling.

Now it is extremely unfortunate that Aljaz failed to meet that deadline due to some sort of delay with his citizenship application but that had nothing to do with the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board, it was either down to Aljaz himself, the relevant British authorities or a combination of the two. I can see why some people feel that either the Davis Cup committee or the ITF should have been flexible given the circumstances but I don't think that anyone can seriously argue that the decision was unreasonable or irrational. The rule was very clear, it did not violate any principles of natural justice and neither the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board acted in arbitrary or unreasonable manner. I therefore see no real ground for an appeal to the CAS. The CAS is there to reverse decisions where organisations have clearly acted unreasonably, either through having unfair rules in place, not following due process or not acting consistently. It is not there to reverse a reasonable decision just because they think it was a bit mean.

theemptyvessel · Club Coach

I guess that it comes down to your interpretation of retroactively. My understanding was that the application for GB citizenship was filed before the rule change was announced as opposed to before it was implemented. If Aljaz followed the correct procedures according to the rules as they were at the start of this process he should not be penalized because of a rule change announced and subsequently implemented whilst he was awaiting his passport.

Vandenburg · Futures level

How long would it take court for arbitration for sport to make a decision? Will be a few years??

Vandenburg · Futures level

The Daily Mail seems to state there is a clause in the ruling mean he cannot appeal to the court arb sport???

Spectator · All-time great

RJA wrote:
I'm sorry but people here clearly don't understand what retroactively means or they have misunderstood the time frame of this case. The rule change was announced during 2014 with it coming into effect for the 2015 competition. A clear deadline was given for when players had to be registered with their new country if they wanted to be exempt from this rule and Aljaz didn't meet that deadline. For the rule to apply retroactively it would have to apply to players who had already changed their nationality at the time of the ruling.

Now it is extremely unfortunate that Aljaz failed to meet that deadline due to some sort of delay with his citizenship application but that had nothing to do with the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board, it was either down to Aljaz himself, the relevant British authorities or a combination of the two. I can see why some people feel that either the Davis Cup committee or the ITF should have been flexible given the circumstances but I don't think that anyone can seriously argue that the decision was unreasonable or irrational. The rule was very clear, it did not violate any principles of natural justice and neither the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board acted in arbitrary or unreasonable manner. I therefore see no real ground for an appeal to the CAS. The CAS is there to reverse decisions where organisations have clearly acted unreasonably, either through having unfair rules in place, not following due process or not acting consistently. It is not there to reverse a reasonable decision just because they think it was a bit mean.

Yes, RJA, I agree with you that it was not retroactive, nor is the application of the rule arbitrary: one was asking for flexibility given a unique set of circumstances, not seeking to correct an illogical or arbitrary decision.

I do think, though, that it was worth taking into account that, as I understand it, over a period of many years, Mr Bedene's actions had been predicated on a given rule, that it is harder to go through the process to gain UK citizenship than it is to gain citizenship in some other countries, that he had not submitted a citizenship application earlier for very valid reasons, and that he had submitted his application before the rule came into force.

The ITF AGM that voted in the new rule occurred in September 2014; it set a deadline of about three months to complete the process. Mr Bedene had resided permanently in the UK since 2011, and there is generally a five-year waiting period. He therefore, with the LTA's support, had to make an rushed application; unsurprisingly, he did not meet the deadline. Given that it would not set a precedent, it feels as if there could have been a bit of flexibility in this one instance.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

Spectator wrote:
RJA wrote:
I'm sorry but people here clearly don't understand what retroactively means or they have misunderstood the time frame of this case. The rule change was announced during 2014 with it coming into effect for the 2015 competition. A clear deadline was given for when players had to be registered with their new country if they wanted to be exempt from this rule and Aljaz didn't meet that deadline. For the rule to apply retroactively it would have to apply to players who had already changed their nationality at the time of the ruling.

Now it is extremely unfortunate that Aljaz failed to meet that deadline due to some sort of delay with his citizenship application but that had nothing to do with the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board, it was either down to Aljaz himself, the relevant British authorities or a combination of the two. I can see why some people feel that either the Davis Cup committee or the ITF should have been flexible given the circumstances but I don't think that anyone can seriously argue that the decision was unreasonable or irrational. The rule was very clear, it did not violate any principles of natural justice and neither the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board acted in arbitrary or unreasonable manner. I therefore see no real ground for an appeal to the CAS. The CAS is there to reverse decisions where organisations have clearly acted unreasonably, either through having unfair rules in place, not following due process or not acting consistently. It is not there to reverse a reasonable decision just because they think it was a bit mean.
Yes, RJA, I agree with you that it was not retroactive, nor is the application of the rule arbitrary: one was asking for flexibility given a unique set of circumstances, not seeking to correct an illogical or arbitrary decision.

I do think, though, that it was worth taking into account that, as I understand it, over a period of many years, Mr Bedene's actions had been predicated on a given rule, that it is harder to go through the process to gain UK citizenship than it is to gain citizenship in some other countries, that he had not submitted a citizenship application earlier for very valid reasons, and that he had submitted his application before the rule came into force.

The ITF AGM that voted in the new rule occurred in September 2014; it set a deadline of about three months to complete the process. Mr Bedene had resided permanently in the UK since 2011, and there is generally a five-year waiting period. He therefore, with the LTA's support, had to make an rushed application; unsurprisingly, he did not meet the deadline. Given that it would not set a precedent, it feels as if there could have been a bit of flexibility in this one instance.

Blimey, this is getting complicated. When I read RJA's post I thought it was a new bit of info (The previous posts had intimated it was totally retrospective and unfair). So it was unfair to Aljaz. Reading your post, I 'get' what has happened with the difficulty in foiling for citizenship, so again agree that the ITF should give Aljaz the opportunity to play for his country, and that this will not set a precedent.

I only hope that Aljaz will try and get a hearing with the CAS, and he will be successful on those grounds.

For the Olympics he would have to play under the 'stateless' flag which is a joke, but I guess better than not playing at all. Would he be allowed to wear GB kit???

Edit: Just wanted to add that I'm really pleased that he won his match today despite the ruling.

-- Edited by Helen40 on Thursday 24th of March 2016 11:19:21 PM

TMH · Futures qualifying

RJA wrote:
I'm sorry but people here clearly don't understand what retroactively means or they have misunderstood the time frame of this case. The rule change was announced during 2014 with it coming into effect for the 2015 competition. A clear deadline was given for when players had to be registered with their new country if they wanted to be exempt from this rule and Aljaz didn't meet that deadline. For the rule to apply retroactively it would have to apply to players who had already changed their nationality at the time of the ruling.

Now it is extremely unfortunate that Aljaz failed to meet that deadline due to some sort of delay with his citizenship application but that had nothing to do with the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board, it was either down to Aljaz himself, the relevant British authorities or a combination of the two. I can see why some people feel that either the Davis Cup committee or the ITF should have been flexible given the circumstances but I don't think that anyone can seriously argue that the decision was unreasonable or irrational. The rule was very clear, it did not violate any principles of natural justice and neither the Davis Cup committee or the ITF board acted in arbitrary or unreasonable manner. I therefore see no real ground for an appeal to the CAS. The CAS is there to reverse decisions where organisations have clearly acted unreasonably, either through having unfair rules in place, not following due process or not acting consistently. It is not there to reverse a reasonable decision just because they think it was a bit mean.

No-one said it was retroactive.

Spectator · All-time great

An interesting "Road to Roland Garros" interview with Mr Bedene: www.youtube.com/watch

He's evidently picked up British irony (at least I'm assuming that accounts for his first response)

theemptyvessel · Club Coach

Rather concerned about the current state of affairs with Aljaz. With no further news since his appeal was turned down I am assuming an appeal to CAS did not happen, not surprising as it was likely to prove expensive and there was limited likelihood of success.

I am afraid this whole year has turned into a bit of a nightmare for him and it is starting to look like he may have shut down for the season. He hasn't played since week 39 in Rome and has withdrawn from a couple of tournaments and is not entered into anything through week 45 now. I know he said that the mental strain of the process caused him to experience physical pain on court and whether he is now injured or just worn down by the bad news it does not look good at the moment. If he does not play again this year he will start next year outside of the top 100 and might even be on dodgy ground for a MD spot at the Australian Open which would be a major blow.

I may be reading too much into this but with no news from the man himself, all of his social media accounts have been silent for a couple of months, it does seem like a rather sad and disappointing end to a promising season. Hopefully 2017 will see him bounce back up into the top 50, he certainly has the talent to be there.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

I'm gutted for him too. I hope that he can get to play for us, and if not he can accept it and be the best tennis player he can be.

I think that the rules have penalised him unfairly. But then when has life been fair. I just hope that despite the financial cost, he will go to CAS, and be allowed to play for us.

airsmashers · County player

I had thought this had all come to an end but it appears not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/39143495

Julia Carrot · All-time great

He's going to be gutted yet again. Sorry for him.

indiana · Tennis legend

Oh for the rule of common sense ...

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

I see Dan and Kyle have been given wildcards to Queens, but not Aljaz. Does anyone know if he requested one. It seems wrong otherwise as he's above Dan in the rankings and way ahead of them both in the race.