Gambling and match-fixing in football and cricket (4 January 1999)

4 January 1999

Gambling and match-fixing in football and cricket

By Qamar Ahmed

Gambling, betting and match-fixing is not a new phenomena in sports. In 1919, eight members of the Chicago White Socks had rocked the baseball scene in America by allegedly fixing the result of the World Series. Known as Black Socks because of it, they were acquitted of the criminal charges by the trial jury but were banned for life by the baseball authorities.

Three Sheffield Wednesday players of the sixties in British football, David Lane, Tony Kay and Peter Swan were all sent to prison on charges of conspiracy to defraud, and were also suspended by the Football association in the most publicised match-fixing controversy in English football.

Last year in a similar case, three footballers, Bruce Grobbelaar, a Zimbabwean, John Fashanu and Hans Segers accused of match-fixing scandal in French football. Marseilles, one of the top clubs of French League after winning the 1993 European Cup by beating AC Milan were stripped of the French title when it was revealed they had fixed the final league game of the French title when it was revealed they had fixed the final league game of the French league against Valenciennes to make sure that they took the honours. Marseilles was not only stripped of the title but were also relegated, the club president and a top-notch politician was imprisoned for their role in the affair.

The game of cricket has its own old history of bribery, match-fixing and gambling. In fact cricket in the 17th and 18th century flourished because it was one sport in which people could put a wager and bet on the outcome of the matches. The bookies therefore hung around the officials and players and reports of that era suggest that some of the results of the matches were influenced by the bookies. The Rev Lord Frederick Beauclerk was then a leading figure in English cricket during the Napoleonic War. He was a gambler and also boasted about it. But it was his influence though which ended match-fixing in English cricket.

In 1817 the bookies were banned and booted out by the MCC and till 1973 it was illegal to bet on cricket on any cricket ground. Now it is all official and every cricket ground has its own section occupied by the bookmakers and one can put a wager on anything. From the winning and losing of the toss to partnership runs and time of declaration. The bookies have also the services of former England cricketers like Godfrey Evans, Chris Cowdrey and Graham Cowdrey to advice them. Similar is the case in countries like Australia, South Africa and New Zealand.However, it is illegal to bet on the game in our part of the world, even in India where one can put only on horse racing. The reason why we now hear all these stories of match-fixing and bribery, some of which may be true but so far unproven. It is not a secret however that the bookmakers do try and lure the participants of the game for a quick buck. A lot of rumours that hang around now are hearsay and title-tattle.

Allegations against the players are mostly made by those who lose money and by those players who are on the verge of being pushed out or those who have some kind of axe to grind against their colleagues. Allegations against Salim Malik, Wasim Akram, Ijaz Ahmed, Mushtaq Ahmed and others has its own sad connotations. Mark Waugh and Shane Warne's admittance of accepting money from the Indian bookies for giving information about the pitch and weather itself stinks of double standard.

In full knowledge of their own admission of accepting money from the bookies and being fined for it by their cricket board they had accused Salim Malik of offering them money to play badly for which they have lost all the credibility. The world has condemned them and they will be damned for rest of their lives. Had they not accepted money for their services to the Indian bookmaker, the whole thing should have been taken as an act naively and innocence. The mere fact that they had accepted money to do that smells foul.

John Woodcock, the doyen of the English press, has summed up the Waugh and Warne's revelation succinctly in the 'The Times,' Waugh and Warne were incredibly naive, extraordinarily brainless, undoubtedly shifty, shamelessly mercenary and seemingly corruptible.'

'It is sad, sordid and debilitating business, which lays the Australian Board and the players involved open to the almost inevitable charge of hypocrisy, regarding the bribery and match-fixing scandal in Pakistan', says Woodcock.

It seems strange to me that a bookie himself admitted in the court of law in Pakistan that he paid money to so players and yet remains free having violated the laws of Pakistan that gambling is illegal. I suppose he should be the first to be charged. Another searching question, of course, is why is it that when the players had submitted their confidential report of their assets, it was made public and got into the newspapers. Who did that? Who ever has done that providing details of the players assets to the press had done a huge disservice to the game and its players, exposing them to the danger of being victims of the crooks that hang around.

If that had happened in England, the people responsible for doing that would have been challenged by the professional players association and taken to the court of law. I am also shocked that statements were given to the press by the officials involved after a witness has recorded his statement in camera. Is anyone there to look into these searching questions?

Grudges against their colleagues and allegations by suspects in their own right, is not evidence enough to punish a suspect. I suppose step should now be taken in that direction by announcing an amnesty to all those who have been accused in Pakistan of bribery controversy with a warning that in future they will have to bear the consequences if found out. To date not one has been found out at least in Pakistan.

Source :: Dawn (https://dawn.com/)