Fixing fixers
By Abhijit Chatterjee

The year: 1996

The event: Semi-final match of the Wills World Cup

The venue: Eden Gardens, Calcutta

The contestants: India and Sri Lanka

INDIA won the toss but strangely enough opted to field on a pitch which showed all signs of breaking up very early in the game. And the home team's decision to field was against all cricketing logic. The strip at the Eden Gardens, which had been covered for quite a long time by a huge stage on which the inaugural ceremony of the World Cup had been held, had not been adequately rolled or watered.

Under such circumstances and even with the local people suggesting to the team management that in case India won the toss they must make first use of the strip, why India fielded first is a big question which remains unanswered long after the event . Maybe, the then India captain Mohammad Azharuddin will give an explanation when he writes his autobiography. But till then the decision of the India team management still rankles. Or is the needle of suspicion pointing somewhere?

For quite some time now the issue of match-fixing, in contrast to betting which, in any case, is legal in quite a few cricket playing countries, has been making the rounds. But all talk of match-fixing was meaningless without the person/persons indulging in the practice being named. Right from the time when India allrounder Manoj Prabhakar had alleged that a team mate had offered him money to throw a one-day match, till now nobody has had the guts to name the match-fixer or fixers. Why ? Are they so powerful that they can harm the career of any cricketer who dares to name them in public ? Or are they having political patronage ? Or are board officials also involved in the fixing ? All these questions deserve an answers. But who will give the answers is yet another question.

To begin with it was thought that match-fixing was an Asian issue — involving only matches involving India and/or Pakistan — but now the issue involved the whole cricketing world. Be it England or Australia or even New Zealand, the question of match-fixing assumed importance since match-fixers are almost in a position to tear apart organised cricket worldwide. The issue has become so cancerous that every time India or Pakistan or for that matter any other team loses a match, it is assumed (and without any proof) that the losing team has thrown the match away. Such a situation should not be allowed to continue because it threatens the very existence of the game.

One can say that the issue of match-fixing became a major issue once cricket went "off shore" to Sharjah first and then to distant venues like Toronto and Singapore. Now and then people who mattered did raise the question of the fairness of the matches played at Sharjah but with so much money coming to the board as well as the players, most people opted to turn the Nelson's eye to the whole issue. Maybe if the board , at least those of India and Pakistan, had acted tough when the issue first surfaced, then it might not have snowballed to such a major international controversy Now it is being whispered that Dawood Ibrahim is the kingpin of the betting racket which has threatened to attack the game like an army of termites. There was a time when Dawood was treated like a messiah of offshore cricket and he was constantly shown sitting in his box at the Sharjah Stadium. But then things have taken a dramatic turnaround .

According to a report of The Observer, of London, Dawood is "one of the most merciless figure in violent and lucrative vortex of Asian betting." The recent game that came into focus was the Champions Cup this April. After Pakistan's opening wins against India and England they lost to them in the return matches. A Pakistan Government official later said that "our players made money in Sharjah but this chapter is closed" Why , he did not elaborate.

When the issue of match-fixing first surfaced in India, the Board of Control for Cricket in India set up a fact-finding committee under retired Supreme Court Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud to probe the matter. After innumerable hearings Justice Chandrachud gave a clean chit to Indian cricketers. Similarly, when the same issue of match-fixing cropped up in Pakistan a commission was set up under Justice Qayyum, who has said that he would give his report to the President of Pakistan, who is Patron of the Pakistan Cricket Board, and then it was up to the President to make the report public or not.

The issue of match-fixing has taken on a new dimension with the London tabloid News of the World reporting that an Indian sports promoter —Aushim Khetrapal, proprietor of Radiant Sports Management —had made an offer of £ 300,000 to former English cricketer Chris Lewis to persuade English players Alec Stewart and Allan Mullaly to throw a Test match against New Zealand in August. Another version of the story says the money was offered to Lewis and New Zealand captain Stephen Flaming to act as conduits to fix the Test match. Both Lewis and Fleming had reported the matter to their respective boards who in turn had apprised the International Cricket Council. But why the council opted to keep mum is difficult to fathom.

But just look at as the cunning of the fixer. he offers to pay a wicketkeeper and the best bowler to play below par. Therefore, even if the other bowlers bowl well and force the batsmen to snick the ball to the wicketkeeper, the latter could always "oblige" the fixer. And in any case it is a well-known fact that one has to bribe just one or two key players of any team to bring about its downfall. All talk of cricket being a team game holds no water because the 'cunning' of just one or two players can change the course of the game.

Subsequently, Jagmohan Dalmiya, president of the International Cricket Council, confirmed that "offers had been made" to English and New Zealand players but refused to name the person. "The matter is under investigation. Beyond this I do not want to say anything on this subject," Dalmiya was quoted as saying. Why has he been so reluctant to take action against the match-fixers who are sullying the fair name of the game ? The best thing he can do is to put all the resources of the International Cricket Council at the disposal of the investigating agencies so that the issue could be resolved once for all.

On receipt of the complaint of the players the head of the International Cricket Council's Code of Conduct Commission, Lord Hughs Griffths, a former MCC president and a judge, decided to involve Scotland Yard in the enquiry. And this step, more than the probe commissions set up by India and Pakistan, is bound to upset the applecart of all the match-fixers because Scotland Yard is bound to get to the bottom of the whole thing unlike the probes conducted by India and Pakistan which, by all account, looked to be cursory. But then it is no use blaming India and Pakistan alone. One remembers how the Australian Cricket Board kept under wraps the payment of $ 11,000 to Shane Warne and Mark Taylor by an Indian bookie (where betting is still not legal) to report on mundane things like pitch condition and weather during Australia's tour of Pakistan.

It could be quite likely that certain people are the front men of the D Company, as Dawood's gang is known, because it is difficult to visualise a sports promoter or fixer raising the kind of money quoted in news reports. But Dawood can certainly offer to give Rs 2 crore to fix a match in which he could earn much , much more than the investment.

But what has upset the calculations of all these match-fixers is the fact that now Scotland Yard has decided to conduct its own enquires and even send a team to India to conduct enquires. And knowing the thoroughness of the detectives of Scotland Yard, they are bound to stumble on the exact story, no matter how complicated.

What the International Cricket Council as well as the various boards should do is to accept the report of Scotland Yard and take appropriate action against players\ officials responsible for fixing matches.

To just suspend them from international cricket will not be enough. Exemplary punishment must be handed out to them no matter how powerful they may be, so that international cricket can return to an even keel.