Concern over Twenty20's corruption risk - ICC
Twenty20 cricket poses a greater corruption threat than the traditional forms of the game, Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, has said. However, he says he isn't perturbed by the IPL's decision not to employ the services of the ICC's Anti-Corruption and Security Unit.
"The board has consistently said it cannot afford to be complacent [about the risk of corruption in Twenty20 cricket]," Lorgat told Cricinfo. "We are mindful that with Twenty20 cricket there is great excitement and money. Put those ingredients into a pot and there is a higher concern."
Lorgat's sentiments echo those of the ACSU's chairman, Sir Paul Condon, who last year told the council's executive board meeting, "the IPL brings with it the biggest threat in terms of corruption in the game since the days of cricket in Sharjah."
There remains a question mark over anti-corruption arrangements for the tournament. The ICC says it offered the IPL use of their security agents for the five-week tournament in South Africa, only to be informed that the Indian league had made its own arrangements.
However, Lalit Modi, the IPL commissioner, denied refusing the ICC's offer of ACSU staff. "We are using the same system as we did last year," he said
The IPL last year formed its own anti-corruption unit, which comprised 10 officers from police and military backgrounds. All were briefed by officials from the ACSU prior to the start of the inaugural IPL.
Several ACSU officers were deployed at last year's IPL - one of whom ejected Kolkata Knight Riders owner Shah Rukh Khan from the players' dug-out for not being properly accredited - and briefed IPL officials at length on anti-corruption matters. None will be in operation in South Africa.
Bob Nicholls, co-owner of the firm charged with providing security for the current IPL season, said anti-corruption measures were not part of their remit. "The ICC anti-corruption and security unit has various functions that they conduct and those include obviously anti-corruption investigations as well as security," Nicholls said. "So the part we do is security. As far the corruption part goes we are only involved only as far as it relates to security because there is a crossover. The crossover part is the security. We have no knowledge about the IPL refusing ACSU on board this season."
Lorgat, though, says he wasn't perturbed by IPL's decision not to employ the services of the ACSU. "It is not dissimilar to county cricket, in that it is a domestic tournament, and the onus for matters such as anti-corruption and doping lie with the home board," he said.
Alex Brown and Ajay Shankar are deputy editors of Cricinfo