Former Australian cricket captain Steve Waugh has revealed 56 cricketers reported illegal approaches by bookmakers to the International Cricket Council last year, after only five players came forward in 2009.
Waugh played his last Test for Australia in 2004 and now plays a pivotal role in attempting to eliminate illegal betting issues from cricket.
The ICC have an anti-corruption and security unit, the body to which players can report suspicious approaches.
Waugh has suggested lie-detector tests would be a good way to catch culprits and also serve as a deterrent.
Waugh, 46, who has taken the polygraph test himself, is currently a member of the MCC’s world cricket committee.
“I don’t know if the ICC is doing enough,” he told BBC Test Match Special. “I’d like to have some conversations with them.
“They are doing some good work because last year 56 players reported an approach by a bookmaker and the year before it was only five, so that suggests the players have confidence in the system and confidence that it will work.
“By taking the lie-detector test I wanted to get the message out there that I was prepared to do this and I saw that [England captain] Andrew Strauss said he was prepared to do one if required too.
“It’s totally voluntary and it’s not about going over the past, it’s about moving forward.”
Waugh also called for lifetime bans for captains caught offending and wants the sport’s biggest names to back him up.
“Any captain found guilty should have a lifetime ban because they set the tone and values of the side,” Waugh said. “If they are doing something wrong it’s a lot easier for the younger kids to get involved in it.
“How can the public get some confidence back? People have been caught only by accident over the years, which only goes to show it’s very hard to prove and catch people.
“So let’s go the other way, let’s be positive about it, have people who are ambassadors for the game and are willing to sign these statements and, if required, back it up with a polygraph.”
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Wasnt there something, many years ago, about meaningless games being places where corrupt conduct could flourish ... thats right, section 79 of the Condon Report. "Cricketers play a high number of One Day Internationals and nothing is really at stake in terms of national pride or selection in some of these matches." Mmmm, meaningless matches by made up teams. That alliterates nearly as well as the Big Bash. http://www.espncricinfo.com/match-fixing-anniversary/content/story/464111.html http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/anti_corruption/condon-report.php
Atawhai Drive
Guest
Professor, clearly you don't believe in "polygraphs". I like the idea of a 15 per cent allowance for truth bending. Umpires could be tested on whether they truly believed someone was chucking. I know Americans take these ridiculous machines seriously, and it seems Steve Waugh does too, which is disappointing. But no one else with a mental age of more than 12 believes in "lie detectors". Waugh has undermined his credibility with this ludicrous charade.
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
I hope the ICC adopts the lie-detector test -- but with the usual 15% allowance for truth-bending, because scientific tests show that everybody lies at one time or another. On a more serious note, here is another example where there is a clash of cultures in the cricketing world. For Waugh, it's simple: if something is true, it's true. This is a very anglo world view, backed up by some sort of faith in a mechanistic measuring-tool for truth. Other societies may place a higher premium on honour than truth, and to ask someone to take a test impugns their honour -- and is also asking them to make an absolute call on a value that they don't necessarily rate as highly as an anglo would. It also sits ill with people who know that Aussies in particular are quite happy to lie by omission (when they have hit a catch but will not walk) -- and this is not only a lie, but a dishonourable lie. It also ignores the difficulties involved in a big-money game, where big-money gambling is involved. Where family and friends may be threatened. Where a small action on field, that has no impact on the game, could prevent the death of a loved one. It also ignores the way administrators have fiddled with the game's rules in a dishonest way, in order to increase their own power and income. If we're going to insist on total honesty as the guiding principle of the game, let's start with the game's administrators at the highest level.