How deep should fixing be investigated?

[Junaids]

My position on this matter is clear, and has not changed since the Amir/Asif/Butt case.

1. Fixing should be investigated aggressively, including pointing out when incidents in matches look suspicious. I'm often unpopular for that, but if suspicious events aren't investigated, you will never unearth anything except by confessions or coincidence.

2. The laws and rules in place should be applied without fear or favour.

But just how deeply should people delve?

This is a key question, and I will explain why without naming and names at all.

It's no secret that 4 of the 5 players currently under the microscope play for one PSL team. And the fifth is a close friend of a key player in that team.

But in Ed Hawkins' book "Bookie, Gambler, Fixer, Spy" - which survived very close legal scrutiny prior to publication - two OTHER members of that team were reported to have been the subject of suspicions of matchfixing and spotfixing respectively at the 2011 Cricket World Cup in India. Most of us who use this forum could name those two players - I won't and I don't think anyone else should - and both of them captained their respective countries after the 2011 incidents.

I can't find any evidence whatsoever of the 2011 incidents ever having been investigated. I know who the players were, who they were playing against and what they were accused of doing.

But there is no evidence in the public domain at all to suggest that the ICC or the Boards in question even asked the players whether the allegations were true or not. Yet both Boards elevated the players to the highest office in the land.

Which begs the question: how closely should these sorts of events actually be investigated? And if the answer is "not at all without evidence", we must all accept that these sorts of events will continue as players learn that allegations or incidents often will not even be questioned.

 

[Tekcirc]

Its always entertaining to have a glimpse of the "mind palace" of armchair "Sherlocks". Just selectively picking up data that suits their narrative!

 

[Junaids]

Its always entertaining to have a glimpse of the "mind palace" of armchair "Sherlocks". Just selectively picking up data that suits their narrative!

IMHO, the problem is this.

I don't think that the ICC or its constituent Boards have ever really wanted to take on matchfixing, let alone spotfixing.

I have always believed that international cricket was riddled with corruption in the 1990s, and many of the players of that era now hold positions of power.

But I also think that the nature of T20 domestic cricket lends itself to rampant fixing. In India, the franchises are an obvious vehicle by which any criminal could launder money.

But bidding systems for players also are possibly the most obvious imaginable way to encourage match fixing. It means that the criminals don't have to make the sort of payment in money or contraband which the McCullum/Vettori/Cairns evidence brought to light, but rather that the auction bid can factor in money for fixing.

Most of us agree that T20 cricket is an obvious target for fixing. Yet hardly anyone has been brought to book for it. The ICL has been nicely scapegoated and the ICC got lucky in being able to (rightly) ban Amir, Asif and Butt for what was actually a newspaper scam with no criminal roots at all.

But T20 leagues deliver too much money to the Boards for anyone to want to delve deep into fixing.

So we see leagues structured in such a way as to encourage money laundering and matchfixing, with the same groups of players travelling the world playing, who are clearly the most mercenary and money-driven players in world cricket.

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[MRSN]

My position on this matter is clear, and has not changed since the Amir/Asif/Butt case.

1. Fixing should be investigated aggressively, including pointing out when incidents in matches look suspicious. I'm often unpopular for that, but if suspicious events aren't investigated, you will never unearth anything except by confessions or coincidence.

2. The laws and rules in place should be applied without fear or favour.

But just how deeply should people delve?

This is a key question, and I will explain why without naming and names at all.

It's no secret that 4 of the 5 players currently under the microscope play for one PSL team. And the fifth is a close friend of a key player in that team.

But in Ed Hawkins' book "Bookie, Gambler, Fixer, Spy" - which survived very close legal scrutiny prior to publication - two OTHER members of that team were reported to have been the subject of suspicions of matchfixing and spotfixing respectively at the 2011 Cricket World Cup in India. Most of us who use this forum could name those two players - I won't and I don't think anyone else should - and both of them captained their respective countries after the 2011 incidents.

I can't find any evidence whatsoever of the 2011 incidents ever having been investigated. I know who the players were, who they were playing against and what they were accused of doing.

But there is no evidence in the public domain at all to suggest that the ICC or the Boards in question even asked the players whether the allegations were true or not. Yet both Boards elevated the players to the highest office in the land.

Which begs the question: how closely should these sorts of events actually be investigated? And if the answer is "not at all without evidence", we must all accept that these sorts of events will continue as players learn that allegations or incidents often will not even be questioned.

Problem is many countries 'protect' their players and leagues if they are caught.. Some also sidelilne players instead of banning..case in point is "Raina caught with meeting Bookie".. it's good PCB and ICC are taking strong measures but I hope other nations step up too.

 

[Cricket World]

Fixing exist in all forms it may come at all levels. Most of them are brushed under the carpet.

 

[badsha001]

Should include all the PSL management people who were named in Justice Quyyum report...

 

[CricketAnalyst]

My position on this matter is clear, and has not changed since the Amir/Asif/Butt case.

1. Fixing should be investigated aggressively, including pointing out when incidents in matches look suspicious. I'm often unpopular for that, but if suspicious events aren't investigated, you will never unearth anything except by confessions or coincidence.

2. The laws and rules in place should be applied without fear or favour.

But just how deeply should people delve?

This is a key question, and I will explain why without naming and names at all.

It's no secret that 4 of the 5 players currently under the microscope play for one PSL team. And the fifth is a close friend of a key player in that team.

But in Ed Hawkins' book "Bookie, Gambler, Fixer, Spy" - which survived very close legal scrutiny prior to publication - two OTHER members of that team were reported to have been the subject of suspicions of matchfixing and spotfixing respectively at the 2011 Cricket World Cup in India. Most of us who use this forum could name those two players - I won't and I don't think anyone else should - and both of them captained their respective countries after the 2011 incidents.

I can't find any evidence whatsoever of the 2011 incidents ever having been investigated. I know who the players were, who they were playing against and what they were accused of doing.

But there is no evidence in the public domain at all to suggest that the ICC or the Boards in question even asked the players whether the allegations were true or not. Yet both Boards elevated the players to the highest office in the land.

Which begs the question: how closely should these sorts of events actually be investigated? And if the answer is "not at all without evidence", we must all accept that these sorts of events will continue as players learn that allegations or incidents often will not even be questioned.

Yeah. This post is spot on.

 

[Tekcirc]

IMHO, the problem is this.

I don't think that the ICC or its constituent Boards have ever really wanted to take on matchfixing, let alone spotfixing.

I have always believed that international cricket was riddled with corruption in the 1990s, and many of the players of that era now hold positions of power.

But I also think that the nature of T20 domestic cricket lends itself to rampant fixing. In India, the franchises are an obvious vehicle by which any criminal could launder money.

But bidding systems for players also are possibly the most obvious imaginable way to encourage match fixing. It means that the criminals don't have to make the sort of payment in money or contraband which the McCullum/Vettori/Cairns evidence brought to light, but rather that the auction bid can factor in money for fixing.

Most of us agree that T20 cricket is an obvious target for fixing. Yet hardly anyone has been brought to book for it. The ICL has been nicely scapegoated and the ICC got lucky in being able to (rightly) ban Amir, Asif and Butt for what was actually a newspaper scam with no criminal roots at all.

But T20 leagues deliver too much money to the Boards for anyone to want to delve deep into fixing.

So we see leagues structured in such a way as to encourage money laundering and matchfixing, with the same groups of players travelling the world playing, who are clearly the most mercenary and money-driven players in world cricket.

What could possibly go wrong?

Sports bodies are not law enforcement agencies, they do not have the authoritative and investigative powers an actual law body would have. They have to rely upon local laws to help them with it. Laws against match fixing are relatively new in most parts of the world.

Even in the no-ball spot fixing, the trio got convicted for , "cheating at gambling. It was still a legal ambiguity over whether they can charge AMir, Butt and Asif criminally.

I don't understand how money laundering automatically enters into the bidding process for IPL. How it relates to match fixing in your head? All sports in the world follow pattern of players dictating their own prices for the franchise they want to play with. Do you mean to say all sports are corrupt? If so, then why rant just about ICC and cricket. Just tone down your obsession to paint IPL in every wrong color as possible.
Not single it is clean, but your analogy are deeply flawed on account of your prejudices.

There are tons of people that have been booked and banned for T20 league match fixing,but you live under the rock it seem.