Question:

Cricket Special Report: Rashid Latif digs deep in match & spot-fixing scandal (Part Four)

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

Cricket Special Report: http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Rashid-Latif-c84084 digs deep in match & spot-fixing scandal (Part Four) 
“If we specifically talk about the spot-fixing then I would say that every act can’t be proved, however, doubtful activities can be judged. Remember the first ball of the 2006-07 Ashes series, which was bowled by http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Steve-Harmison-c2576.
The ball was pitched wide and went further away and eventually grabbed by a first slip fielder. Now it can be called an error as well as spot-fixing but nobody questioned Harmison’s intentions because such practices were not common then.
 
Another incident was of 2005 test match between http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Pakistan-c755 and Australia in Sydney. At that time I was doing research on the spot-fixing. I created an account on www.bet365.com.
During the match http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Adam-Gilchrist-c918 were at the wicket. For the fourth wicket the rate of stump out was 15-1 (bear in mind that the last batsman was also stumped). In view of that situation I thought that the next batsman would also be stumped, hence I put 5 pounds.
After 20 minutes Michael http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Clark-c51118 was stumped off Kaneria and I earned 75 pounds. On the 5th wicket the rate of stump-out fell to 1-11. I again put 5 pounds and later I got 55 pounds, as the batsman again got stumped. Imagine if I had collectively put 2000 pounds then how much would I have earned?
 
Now another point of concern for me is the presence of a laptop in the dressing rooms with internet connection, which is mostly used by a coach. In my view, the laptop with internet connection should not be allowed in the dressing room because players can use it for betting on their wickets.
I am not saying that both players (Clark and Gilchrist) were involved in spot-fixing but the sequence of events was enough to create a doubt in my mind.
Imagine if a player had put 5000 pound at a rate of 15/1, then without a shadow of suspicion he would have easily earned 75000 pounds, and since he was not caught hence would not be called a culprit. Here, I want to say that a player is called a cheat only when he is caught, otherwise nobody points a finger at him, and believe me 50 per cent of the players fall in this category.
I was an average player, yet I was offered money for wrongdoings and I brought it into the knowledge of the ICC, then how would I believe that offers are not made to top players.
The reality is that they don’t disclose it to the ICC. Now people would question that why am I supporting it despite being the whistleblower; the fact of the matter is that whatever I witnessed has happened with me and I did not have solid evidence like a video etc.
 
In this case Mazhar Majeed and http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Mazhar-c75448 Mehmood are telling a half truth, which is even more lethal than a blatant lie. Being a Pakistani I had no choice but to poke my nose in and reveal the facts.
My strive is to unearth the reality behind this episode that these guys have no interest whatsoever in cricket; they are in fact doing it for money only.
 
People often tag Pakistanis as cheats, okay I agree with it to some extent but what about the guy who broke the story for the News of the World – HE IS ALSO A CHEAT (Pakistani). 
Analysis
The most notable part of this whole turn of events is that the ICC’s ACSU has maintained its silence on the matter for a long time now, despite Rashid’s repeated pleas, the governing body of the game did not take strong steps to stem out the ailment.
All of a sudden, after the accusations against Pakistan trio of Salman Butt, Mohammad Aamer and Mohammad Asif the corruption watchdog ACSU decided to run a parallel investigation with the http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Scotland-c756 Yard, yet other than suspending the trio no other evidence has been gathered.
Many former cricketers and even law-makers believe that the ICC cannot hand out bans to these players, and would try their best to sweep the matter under the carpet, as they are a party to the crime.
Even if they do hand out what might appear as strong punishments on paper, they are likely to take a U-turn a year or two later and exonerate the players, as betting has become part and parcel of the international game, and is unmistakably the biggest revenue generator for the players and administrators.
 

 Tags:

   Report
SIMILAR QUESTIONS

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 0 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.