ICC meeting full of sound & fury signifying nothing

The emergency meeting of the ICC was, as expected, full of sound and fury but the bottom-line was that it signified nothing. The stable door was being shut long after the horse had bolted. If the bookies had operated with impunity in the past, they will be a little less brazen from now on. The pledges that cricketers will have to undertake are reminiscent of the "loyalty oaths" that government servants were made to take during the McCarthy witch-hunt in the United States. Some purpose might have been served if the punishments and penalties prescribed were to apply retroactively.

There are three known cases of players who have admitted to having links with the bookies, Shane Warne, Mark Waugh and more recently Hansie Cronje. The two Australians have virtually gone scot-free, token fines were imposed and as of now, Hansie Cronje has been stripped of the captaincy and the South Africans have appointed a judicial commission. Though Cronje's case may be different because it is the Delhi police that is building up the case and we will have to wait and see how that turns out.

The ICC gave a clean bill of health to Jagmohan Dalymia which was expected. In any case awarding of television contracts do not come within the purview of match-fixing. That would come within the purview of abuse of office for personal financial gain and one can't help feeling that the allegations against him are merely a continuation of a kind of tribal feud between him and Mr Bindra, the former BCCI chief.

What I am surprise about is the apparent silence of Dr Ali Bacher. He had claimed that he had information from credible sources and he would lay this information or evidence before the ICC. I don't know whether he did or whether he was asked to do so. He may have claimed to have been misquoted by the Australian newspaper but he does not deny that he gave the interview. His statement that two of the World Cup matches had been "fixed" and his accusations against Javed Akhtar got considerable international publicity. A simple retraction was not enough. There should have been an unconditional apology. Clearly the ICC wanted to get tough with the players while handling their own with soft hands.

So far, it has been the players who have borne the brunt of match-fixing allegations. Cricket board officials and even umpires have escaped suspicion. In the free-for-all it is assumed that only players can fix matches or give vital information to bookies. By making the players the centre of attraction, the field of investigation has been narrowed. But after all is said and done, more will be said than done. During World War-2, people were discouraged from making unnecessary railway trips and I remember seeing posters stuck up at public places that asked the question: "Is your Journey Really Necessary?" This is the question that I would like to ask all the distinguished gentlemen who gathered at Lord's: was their journey really necessary?"

What is extremely disturbing is serious allegations that are being levelled by Mr Bindra and he appears to be showing a crusader's zeal. What these allegations have done is to have brought match-fixing to India and deflected attention away from South Africa. I am frankly surprised that Kapil Dev's name has been mentioned and since the former Indian cricket captain and the present coach has decided to take legal action, I would not like to comment on it. I think it is the right procedure. Let the law courts decide. This is what I had recommended to some of the Pakistan players when their names were being bandied about. I had told them that their battle should not be fought in the media: if an accuser was confident enough, let him bring his proof to a court of law and if the accused was confident of his innocence, he too should seek redress from a court of law.

But it is important that we should not let match-fixing become an obsession and we should go back to enjoying cricket. The Asia Cup is round the corner and in the meantime Pakistan will have played their first Test match against the West Indies at Guyana. When I switched on the television to watch the first day's play I suffered something of a culture-shock. Who were these elegant people dressed in white? And what had happened to those dressed like clowns? Then I realised that I was watching Test cricket, the real thing and also how much I had missed it. Even the umpires were smartly turned out and did not look pall-bearers. The tempo was slower though not the pace of Ambrose and Walsh and Wasim Akram. One saw the posting of four slips and a gully and a cluster of fielders around the bat as Mushtaq weaved his magic. I realised that when I complained of too much cricket, what I really meant was that there was not enough Test cricket. Test cricket, I am told by the young cricket fan, is boring. I accept that because ballet would be boring too for his generation. But ballet has survived and will survive and the present fads will not. But having said that let me also say that a hundred by Inzamamul Haq in any version of cricket is a thing of beauty.