Pakistan fixing scandal a blight on the game

Once they performed an act designed in secret in order for money to be made by not being honest to the public, they are knowingly and wittingly involved in conspiracy to commit fraud. This is different to cheating, such as ball-tampering, which is purely an in-game thing. Its not "two deliberate no-balls" which got prison time, it is wittingly being involved in act designed to defraud vast sums of money (albeit from gamblers themselves acting illegally by the very act of gambling being illegal in the countries concerned) which resulted in the time in prison. This is, in many respects, no different to insider trading in the stock market, where certain individuals do not disclose knowledge that has a major impact on a market (in this case a spot-betting market, but the modern stock and money markets are often little better than that anyway) and then act upon that knowledge to the detriment of a fair market.

Strictly speaking NT isn't a state, but anyway... Cricket ought to be the biggest sport in Australia, or close to. It has every advantage: mainstream popularity in every state, and in regional and metropolitan regions, relatively little competition in its core season, major modern stadiums, free-to-air tv coverage (sort of, not domestically), news coverage beyond the interest shown from the general public, and international competition without losing players to international leagues. But a long time ago, practically the beginning in fact, it put its eggs in the basket labelled "international cricket" and it has stifled it since. International cricket coverage out-competes domestic cricket for interest, viewers and everything else, produces a product that in competitive terms is generally sub-par, significantly reduces the total number of high quality games played (which reduces total audience), and the quality of the seasonal narrative and is then forced to subsidise domestic operations. Cricket has, by far, the smallest professional playing base, the weakest aggregate crowds of the major sports and probably only beats the A-league in total income. Given its inherent advantages, that is pretty poor. That said, perhaps the BBL will change that, though I doubt it; sports need stars to shine, and the BBL's biggest stars are playing international cricket still. Not sure that is entirely CAs fault mind, and certainly not the current crowd.

Thanks for this link Ian, however my original point was that Pakistani cricketers in the vast majority of cases come from the privileged elite who have plenty - even without a large cricketing income.

Brett, "It’s the only sport in Australia with professional representation in all states." Untrue - the Northern Territory has the NT Thunder, and cricket doesnt. Cricket might get three times a year when it gets a crowd of 70 000. But League will get that, and to spare, at Origin, and maybe in finals, and it will get a lot more crowds of 15-20 000 than cricket does. As far as Australian Rules goes, the TSL is a pretty sad competition, probably the least healthy of any of the state leagues, and it has ten clubs with a salary cap of $70 000. Ten teams, thats $700 000. Actually, thats pretty darn close to what Tasmania pays it's state cricketers. Then there is association football, which just got 40 000 to a club game, and 25 000 to a midweek match against Malaysia in Canberra. Yes, cricket isnt a major sport in Australia, not any more. Ian Whitchurch http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2010/06/14/152271_sport-news.html

Johnno, the courts aren't really the place to deal with punishments for match fixing. That is the ICC's role, and they have meted out punishments of 5 years and more. The courts are really dealing with fraud (conspiracy to commit fraud against book-makers or gamblers). In that respect their punishments are broadly in line with what you'd expect, although perhaps an additional fine would have been appropriate. I don't feel sorry for Amir. There were respected figures in the Pakistan dressing room that, but general consensus, weren't fixing matches. Afrida, Younis Khan, Mohammad Yousuf: all driven out of the captaincy, and the game by Butt and his coterie of fixers. The only pity that might come their way is that they are only the fall guys for a conspiracy that almost certainly extends through the selection panel, probably the coach (whose record in this area is not clean), and the board itself. The punishment for fixing should be to ban the players for a long time, and the team for a short time. Or, if not ban them, relegate them to WCL8, let them play against Bhutan, Germany and Nigeria, until they learn that their living depends on them maintaining their own status within the cricketing world. And that, even honest members of a team need to be vigilant, not indifferent, to corruption happening around them.

a lot of things were suggested during this trial, VC. Some of it might even be true...

Ian, that's plainly not true. Despite its evident failings in recent years, Cricket Australia is still a healthy operational body. Participation rates in all states are still pretty solid. It's the only sport in Australia with professional representation in all states. It could do a lot of things better, don't get me wrong, but I don't know how much more major it can be.. (I won't speak for NZ, but I don't believe your statement rings true there either)

Let's not forget that it was suggested during this trial that "the Aussies are the biggest fixers of them all"............................

Brendon do you really think the ARU and CA are really well run administrations. The ECB in England is a much better run cricket board now in developing talant, than CA is now. CA is a mess Brendon. NZ cricket i do not now a lot about but the NZRU under MR Tew do not fill me with a lot of confidence running NZ rugby in the future. To be honest i think the sentences should of been even harder for Salman Butt , he is from a wealthy family , well educated an the captain. A teammete said about Asif , how does this man own 4 house all really nice houses each far nicer than mine, and i only own 1 house and my 1 house is not as nice. Well there you go by this recent scandal on match fixing. I would of given Slaman Butt 10 years, yes 10 years and that would sure scare the hell out of players doing match fixing , really make slamna butt an example of. 10 years would of runnier salmon butt's life forever, and sent clear message this match fixing will not be tolerated. With match fixing you impact on so many levels of a sport. The players, it stuffs up opponents coaching and playing staff. Coaches wrongly pick players for next match based on winning match fixed games, so certain players ability gets inflated, the fans of course who pay to see a match fixed contest when they are not told of it eg WWF wrestling. And media networkjs it costs them money as they wont invest anymore thus losing good revenue form cricket tv ratings. I think the IPL for the sake of cricket should let pakistan players in to reduce there incentive to match fix. ANd who says india has a perfect record with there players not being caught for match fixing eg former indian cricket captain azzahrudin. And most of the cricket bookmakers and bets come form India more than any other country in the world. Amir is the one ir early fell sorry for. only 18 form a desperately poor family, not educated or wealthy family like Salaman Butt. I have read about Ami'rs background and it is very poor and sad. And these are type of socio comic status that terrorist groups like the talbian in pakistan target and recruit forcibly or non forcibly through propaganda. People like amir did not get chances like good educations, or university options, and im sure he would of been intimidated to do this. His mum on tv after the verdict said he had been forced into it, and intimidated to. I think 6 months is fine or i would of even let him free. But i woud have had no issues giving Salamn Butt 10 years, and same with Amir, both form very different backgournds and age than the Amir who is from a poor background and vulnerable, in such a politically hostile and troubled, terrorist laden country like Pakistan.

The problem with this theory is that cricket has already ceased to exist as a major sport in Australia and New Zealand.

Brendon, this is a great post. Really well said...

Paying more to Pakistani cricketers might decrease the amount of match fixing but it wont cure it by any stretch of the imagination. The underlying problem with Pakistani cricket is the same problem with FIFA. That being its the most dominate sport with no real rival. Cricket dominates the Pakistani and has done sone for the past 30 years with the decline of hockey in the Subcontinent. FIFA knows everyone knows they are corrupt but they don't care. Football is by far the largest sport in the world and FIFA can act like thieves and scoundrels and get away with it. Cricket in Pakistan is the game. Administrators know they can be useless, corrupt and ineffectual because there is no sport rivalling cricket in Pakistan. Monopolies are always inefficient. We whinge and moan about CA in this country but if CA ran cricket like the PCB does then cricket would cease to exist as a major sport in this country. Same with England, South Africa and New Zealand. I once asked a Pakistani guy I worked with if before coming to Australia did he know cricket is only one of a bunch of major sports in Australia and replied "no". He knew we played other players like Aussie rules and rugby but he thought cricket was the most popular sport all throughout Australia and that we all followed cricket in the same way they do in Pakistan. And this links to the attitude and ideas of the ICC and BCCI. I dont think people on the Subcontinent understand that cricket could stop being a major sport in other countries. The damage scandals like this do to the image of the game seems to be overlooked.

BigAl, Being Pakistani, they are blackballed from the IPL, partly due to the terrorist wing of the Hindu Nationalist movement's threats (*). This really cuts back on their earning capacity. Ian Whitchurch (*) Really. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/shahrukh-khan-warned-by-shiv-sena-for-backing-pakistani-cricketers-to-play-in-ipl/story-e6frg7rx-1225826978183

Just how 'hard up' are Pakistani cricketers ? Given the nature of their country, rising to the top would indicate they most likely come from that 2% ? of the populace that are not doing too badly. ???

Regrettably, this means the Boards want two lots of television money for the same tour. Thus, the Big Four play each other, and cricket becomes a worse and worse option for players outside the four teams from rich countries. With Chris Gayle, we've already seen a player pick club over country. Oh, and as far as criminal convictions go, the Black Socks were looking at five years over the fixed World Series in 1919, but the jury returned a not-guilty verdict.

Chris, it's also hardly the "big four's" fault that television networks will pay more to broadcast series involving them, moeny of which helps to pay these players well..

David, just on your opening line, three corrupted players and their corrupted agent have been found guilty of conspiracy to fix portions of a Test Match, the ultimate form of the game, and at the game's spiritual home no less. That they've been locked away as a consequence is a pretty big favour to international cricket, I'd argue. Any custodial sentence to convicted match fixers has to be seen as a good thing, surely? You'll get no arguements from me about the ICC's coat-tail riding in this episode, but I don't think we should play down the significance of the sentences handed down overnight.

The ICC doesn't organise tours though. They are run almost completely independent of the ICC and always have been. I'm not sure why people persist with this line of criticism of the ICC. They don't run cricket, the full members do. Direct your ire there.

David, what ICC money? Unlike FIFA or the IRB, the ICC distributes well over 90% of the money it receives from its major events (primarily the world cup) to its full members. $30m each, no questions asked, leaving it to scrimp and save to run competitions and support development in the other 95 associate and affiliate members. The idea that the ICC can somehow create money to pay Pakistan (or the West Indies, or Zimbabwe, or Bangladesh, or Sri Lanka, or New Zealand, or South Africa, none of whom make significant money), is preposterous. If a body is going to top up player payments it is going to have to be come from Cricket Australia, the ECB or the BCCI, and good luck with that. The administration of the ICC are average at what they do, but they are constantly stifled by the full member boards on the executive, and they are as hopeless a collection of greedy, self-serving incompetents as you'll find. Secondly, on what basis are you claiming the ACSU has done nothing? They produced substantial evidence for this court case, by their account. Bodies attempting to uncover corruption don't broadcast what they do and don't find, and who they have and haven't got evidence on. Not unless they want their informants quieted, or worse, killed. Knowledge of what they are doing is absolutely non-essential for journalists or fans. True, they might be doing nothing, but it is far more likely they are hunting after specific proof of a very easy to hide crime on a minimal budget ($2m is a pittance). They are a Schrodinger's Cat of a body: until they let you see what evidence they've found, it isn't possible or desirable to know what evidence they've found.

I wonder what has the ICC done lately in terms of this issue-or anything at all. It seems to me that the ICC is more concerned about the cash cow that is T20 cricket rather than eliminating cheating and match-fixing out of the game. And speaking of the ICC.I was watching on YouTube highlights of the 1991 West Indies v Australia Test series. Seeing that was played under the auspices of the ICC, why didn't the ICC use the series to trial these things which is commonplace now in cricket, but foreign back in 1991-neutral umpires (would've been Dickie Bird and David Shepard), third umpire and the match referee. Which would mean that incidents like the Dean Jones 'run out'. and clashes between Desmond Haynes & Ian Healy wouldn't had happened. Instead what did the ICC do-they left it in the hands of the WICB and it resulted in one of the most unpleaseant series ever played.