[JumpCrisscross]

> If the dates are real from the records everyone has found then he would, in theory, still qualify

Djokovic pursued an exemption on the basis of recovery. That requires a positive test followed by a negative one. If the allegations here hold, he tested negative and then positive. That wouldn't be proof of recovery, but of infection.

[mfer]

There is a lot we don't know and I'm slow to judge and curious for more information.

For example, was he getting regular rests due to being tennis? Did the wrong ID for the recovery test result get submitted by accident? This is plausible and accidents do happen.

I'll be curious to see more details that come out on this.