|
|
Post by flashblade on Feb 24, 2017 19:33:58 GMT
far too many silly points being made on here.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 19, 2017 7:42:14 GMT
For those of us who thought the look of contempt on Giles Clarke's face as he handed Mohamed Amir the man of the match cheque in 2010 showed withering disdain for match-fixing, or even those who recall the curl of Jim May's lip and the steeliness in his tone as he talked about what Vincent and Naved Arif had done and how it had affected his Sussex team, even these extremes of bitterness and disgust fall hopelessly short of the massive over-reaction of Abdul Quadir's recommendations in talking about the roots of the current PCL match-fixing scandal. indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/there-would-have-been-no-fixing-if-wasim-akram-inzamam-ul-haq-waqar-younis-were-hanged-says-abdul-qadir-4575065/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebookAnd yet draconian and illiberal though his proposed solutions are, there is a kernel of truth buried beneath the husks of hyperbole. Remembering the massive publicity given all over the world to the Quayyum report and the sentences it is hard to disagree with Quadir when he says effectively that Malik and Rehman were the fall guys, not the worst offenders, and not the most beloved by sponsors. There was strong enough evidence that most of the players he mentions here, not least the latter-day Saint Mushtaq of Eaton Road, were actively involved in betting and had they been cast out of the game it would have sent a signal at the very least. As it is, these things are swept under the carpet in Pakistan particularly but not exclusively. The latest rumoured rehabilitation is for the disgraced Captain of the 2010 Fixers, Salman Butt, It's said that the chairman of selectors wants him back in the Test side now his ban is over, but the captain who led them away from that nadir of shame, Misbah Ul Haq, objects. It's now feared that Misbah could be replaced as captain by Butt by that same chairman. The name of the chairman of selectors is....Inzamam Ul Haq |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Mar 19, 2017 8:47:22 GMT
For those of us who thought the look of contempt on Giles Clarke's face as he handed Mohamed Amir the man of the match cheque in 2010 showed withering disdain for match-fixing, or even those who recall the curl of Jim May's lip and the steeliness in his tone as he talked about what Vincent and Naved Arif had done and how it had affected his Sussex team, even these extremes of bitterness and disgust fall hopelessly short of the massive over-reaction of Abdul Quadir's recommendations in talking about the roots of the current PCL match-fixing scandal. indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/there-would-have-been-no-fixing-if-wasim-akram-inzamam-ul-haq-waqar-younis-were-hanged-says-abdul-qadir-4575065/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebookAnd yet draconian and illiberal though his proposed solutions are, there is a kernel of truth buried beneath the husks of hyperbole. Remembering the massive publicity given all over the world to the Quayyum report and the sentences it is hard to disagree with Quadir when he says effectively that Malik and Rehman were the fall guys, not the worst offenders, and not the most beloved by sponsors. There was strong enough evidence that most of the players he mentions here, not least the latter-day Saint Mushtaq of Eaton Road, were actively involved in betting and had they been cast out of the game it would have sent a signal at the very least. As it is, these things are swept under the carpet in Pakistan particularly but not exclusively. The latest rumoured rehabilitation is for the disgraced Captain of the 2010 Fixers, Salman Butt, It's said that the chairman of selectors wants him back in the Test side now his ban is over, but the captain who led them away from that nadir of shame, Misbah Ul Haq, objects. It's now feared that Misbah could be replaced as captain by Butt by that same chairman. The name of the chairman of selectors is....Inzamam Ul Haq To this day, I'm still puzzled that such a tainted figure attracts so much undiluted hero worship from the Sussex faithful. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 19, 2017 8:55:34 GMT
For those of us who thought the look of contempt on Giles Clarke's face as he handed Mohamed Amir the man of the match cheque in 2010 showed withering disdain for match-fixing, or even those who recall the curl of Jim May's lip and the steeliness in his tone as he talked about what Vincent and Naved Arif had done and how it had affected his Sussex team, even these extremes of bitterness and disgust fall hopelessly short of the massive over-reaction of Abdul Quadir's recommendations in talking about the roots of the current PCL match-fixing scandal. indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/there-would-have-been-no-fixing-if-wasim-akram-inzamam-ul-haq-waqar-younis-were-hanged-says-abdul-qadir-4575065/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebookAnd yet draconian and illiberal though his proposed solutions are, there is a kernel of truth buried beneath the husks of hyperbole. Remembering the massive publicity given all over the world to the Quayyum report and the sentences it is hard to disagree with Quadir when he says effectively that Malik and Rehman were the fall guys, not the worst offenders, and not the most beloved by sponsors. There was strong enough evidence that most of the players he mentions here, not least the latter-day Saint Mushtaq of Eaton Road, were actively involved in betting and had they been cast out of the game it would have sent a signal at the very least. As it is, these things are swept under the carpet in Pakistan particularly but not exclusively. The latest rumoured rehabilitation is for the disgraced Captain of the 2010 Fixers, Salman Butt, It's said that the chairman of selectors wants him back in the Test side now his ban is over, but the captain who led them away from that nadir of shame, Misbah Ul Haq, objects. It's now feared that Misbah could be replaced as captain by Butt by that same chairman. The name of the chairman of selectors is....Inzamam Ul Haq To this day, I'm still puzzled that such a tainted figure attracts so much undiluted hero worship from the Sussex faithful. MUSHTAQ AHMED Former Pakistan player Saleem Pervez appeared before the Commission of Inquiry and stated that he had paid Mushtaq Ahmed (and Salim Malik) a sum of US$ 100,000. This was for fixing a match in Sri Lanka against Australia for the Singer Trophy in 1994. The scorecard for that Singer Trophy match shows that Mushtaq Ahmed gave away 34 runs in 10 overs, took two wickets giving away four wides. He remained not out scoring 2 off 3 balls before the 50 overs were completed. (Full scorecard in appendix:) It was interesting that when Mushtaq Ahmed appeared before this commission, he seemed to know already which match we were going to ask him about. And he blurted out, 'I was OK in that match.' Former Pakistan team coach Javed Miandad said in his statement that Mushtaq had confessed to him that he had a one time involvement in match-fixing. Mr. Javed Burki has also stated that Mushtaq and Malik were often seen at a Khalid Gitty's, a bookie's residence. He added that Mr. Naeem Gulzar can confirm this. However, when Mr. Gulzar appeared he named Malik and Ijaz as likely culprits in match-fixing but stated he did not have any proof. He did not deny or confirm Mr. Burki's allegations. FINDINGS, REASONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: While this Commission is minded to accept the testimony of Saleem Pervez after he managed to withstand cross-examination (taking note of the inconsistencies raised by Mr. Azmat Saeed in Pervez's statements), it is difficult to believe after looking at Mushtaq's figures, that he was trying to throw away the match. His performance in the context of the match was better than most. If one were to compare this with the performance of others then it appears difficult to hold that Mushtaq was involved in match-fixing, not giving his best. The two wickets he took were of the Waugh twins. This raises some doubt in my mind that Mushtaq was involved. There is, of course, a possibility that if Mushtaq was involved in match-fixing, he could well have used someone else to bowl or bat badly. However, there is no evidence to this effect. There is of course as earlier mentioned one source of strong corroboration that may be checked for support of Saleem Pervez's testimony and that is Mr. Aftab Butt. Mr. Butt will be examined soon and a supplementary report will be made following up shortly on the heels of this Report. While this Commission cannot for the time being make a finding of guilt to the requisite standard because, in fairness to Musthaq, Mr. Butt needs to be examined, there are sufficient grounds to cast strong doubt on Mushtaq Ahmad. He has brought the name of the Pakistan team into disrepute with inter alia associating with gamblers. This Commission therefore recommends that Mushtaq Ahmed be censured, kept under close watch and be not given any office of responsibility (selection or captaincy) in the team or on the board. Furthermore, he should be fined Rs. 3 lac. Final findings against Mushtaq on the charge of match-fixing will soon follow in the Supplementary statement. static.cricinfo.com/db/NATIONAL/PAK/NEWS/qayyumreport/qayyum_report.html(Mr Butt was not available to give his evidence and so no other punishment or recommendation was concluded) |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Mar 19, 2017 9:35:13 GMT
The timing too is interesting given it is Bob Woolmer's 10th Anniversary of his death which some believe remains shrouded in mystery. Pakistan had just lost to Ireland - rumours were flying around the game had been fixed - and Woolmer, some suggest, was aware of his team's cheating, and in disgust was going to tell the media the following day. As with most conspiracy theories fact and fiction often become muddled and while the original autopsy was ridiculed for suggesting Woolmer was first poisoned and then strangled, given the extent of the Pakistan match-fixing at the time, which perhaps went on for two decades before it finally came to light during their UK tour in 2010, allowing the original diagnosis to stand firm would have caused disarray to International cricket and may have brought to light the rampant cricket-fixing going on in Asia. Suggesting the ICC, for example, were in league with the Asian underworld seems more likely than not, imho; but imagine the chaos if that had been proven? Even today, when I watch a Pakistan or India match, and an unlikely result occurs, I question the outcome. From the list below, up to 70% of those charged with match-fixing hail from Asia of which the vast majority come from Pakistan and India. And the list does not include a host of them suspected but never charged. Away from Asia only South Africa show up on the radar. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cricketers_banned_for_corruption I have mentioned before, when interviewing Ed Hawkins a few years back about his book, Bookie Gambler Fixer Spy, what he told me off-the-record sent chills up my spine. His book only offers 40% of the research he uncovered. The other 60% is either too dangerous to disclose or there is not sufficient evidence to prove it. For, when interviewing some of the Asian bookies, after a few drinks, they sang like canary birds. PS: To be fair re: Mushy, he was a changed man when contracted to Sussex. Allah had helped him find a new path and his signing is very much down to Peter Moores who on meeting him knew, almost immediately, that Mushtaq had cleaned up his act. But that didn't stop the Sussex Committee having a fractious battle over whether the club should sign him. Mushtaq was not the team's first choice. In fact, some suggest he was the third choice and for those on the Board who had not met him, the perception being: the Pakistani was a washed up has-been. John Snow was vehemently against signing Mushy and he was supported by other Committee members like Richard Barrow. But loyalty was also being shown to Peter Moores and his strong feeling that Mushtaq was a new man. In the end, I've been told, it was "Dear Johnny" who stepped in and with his wonderful way with words and his ability to diffuse a heated atmosphere, told the Board they should go with "Mooresy's instincts". Thank God they did!! |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 23, 2017 15:24:01 GMT
Allegedly, the latest on the PCL match-fixing case lastwordoncricket.com/2017/03/23/report-sharjeel-khan-played-two-dot-balls-bookies/Meanwhile in a rehashed story on Cricinfo, Graham Gooch seems immune to irony. www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2017/content/story/1088032.htmlIn a story headlined "Gooch funds gambling awareness education for all counties" about the PCA's courses aimed at increasing gambling awareness amongst players, to which a charitable fund represented by Gooch has contribute £50K, he is reported as saying "... I am particularly interested in helping out with the education of young cricketers with all the worries and concerns of online gambling and getting into bad habits". So far, so very good and honourable. Then the descent into something that could be described as naivety, or blithering idiocy: "Personally I have never been a gambler," Gooch continued. "But I do like going to a horse racing track and having a bet there. I've also hosted Ladbrokes in hospitality boxes at Test Matches so I don't have any issues with gambling. " Well that makes it all right, doesn't it? Because hosting a few chaps from Ladbroke's in a hospitality box at a Test isn't really going to hurt anyone is it? It's not as if you're actually rewarding, even courting the people who represent the "acceptable" face of the bookmaking profession, the people who remind you that of course you must "bet responsibly" while encouraging the opposite. As the PCA CEO David Leatherdale says, one in four males between the ages of 18 and 24 "likely to have some form of gambling problem" . Still, good to know old Goochie doesn't have any issues, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 29, 2017 13:24:51 GMT
More on the PCL case. Mohammad Irfan has been banned for a year for failing to report approaches made to him, though this term may be reduced if he complkies with certain conditions. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/39264715Michael Vaughan on Twitter is in favour of banning him for life, though he'd probably settle for hanging, drawing, quartering and having his head skewered by a pike and displayed outside the Tower....  |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Aug 28, 2018 23:26:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 15, 2018 11:25:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 15, 2018 11:31:08 GMT
On Sky Sport News, Nasser Hussain implied that he wasn't surprised . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 15, 2018 12:37:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 15, 2018 20:01:06 GMT
I agree. Nasser actually said that the news came as no surprise because there had been so many rumours flying around, presumably within the cricket community. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 16, 2018 9:14:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 18, 2018 15:02:44 GMT
So Danish Kaneira was a cheat and a liar all along. Are we surprised? The person I feel sorry for is Westfield who through naivety was caught up in the Pakistani's web. People like Kaneira should be locked up in a prison and the key thrown away. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/45899710 |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 19, 2018 8:41:10 GMT
|
|
