Justice Chandrachud Committee Report (Part II)
1
22-Apr-2000
Part II
1. The immediate cause of reference made to me by BCCI in the
cover story which appeared in the Outlook magazine in its issue
dated 11 June 1997, containing statements made by Manoj
Prabhakar. The reference sets out those statements. However, in
the interest of fullness. I consider it expedient to reproduce
the various statements made by Manoj Prabhakar as reported in the
cover story of the Outlook -- Those statements are as follows:-
(a) I distinctly remember the match at Sharjah in 1991 when I was
at the crease with Sanjay Manjrekar, when we decided to walk off
because of failing light. To our surprise we received the signal
from the team management to play on.
(b) Unfortunately in situations where money deals are made in the
dark and no proof is available we can only shake our head in
disbelief. I noticed that such dealing seemed to be manipulated
right from the top and the players who had reached the pinnacle,
did not seem to be doing the right thing at crucial times.
(c) Somewhere in the same period I was also approached by certain
quarters to perform below power in a certain match.
(d) Before the India-Pakistan match in Sri Lanka for the Single
cup in 1994 I was offered Rs. 25 lakh by an Indian team member
for sabotaging the match in Pakistan's favour. I was told to play
belowe my usual standard. I told him to get out of my room. I
told him that I would never do what he was telling me to do.
Because of this I soon acquired that tag of a spoilsport in that
group. This did not stop the offers though, which flows in
regularly.
(e) There are times that things are so obvious, the entire nation
has watched it happen. In Kanpur, when we were chasing the West
Indies score, Mongia came into bet and conveyed The Management's
instructions to try and get as close to the target. The resultant
hullabaloo about my going slow should be directed at the team
management and not me as I was doing so under their instructions.
Infact due someone to else's fault, I was dropped and humiliated.
(f) Commercialisation of cricket has changed it's face it's no
longer just a game; it's a game where money is the main
motivator. Sponsors and bookies have started exerting pressure
and games are now being increasingly fixed.
(g) I remember the incident at Sharjah when Aamir Sohail and
Azhar went out to toss and both came back claiming that the other
had won it.
(h) There are players who spend 5000 Dirhams on a suit. Some have
fancy cars. Nobody gives those kind of things for nothing.
(i) Why approach a player or the team when you can get an explayer? You approach players only when you want to influence the
game And its best influenced when you're chasing.
Besides the above said statements, Manoj Prabhakar is reported to
have made the following statements:
(i) If I could ever reveal all that I have gone through and seen,
you would see that in this hamam (bathroom) of Indian cricket
almost everyone is naked. ("The Statesman" dated 10th June 1997)
(ii) At the time in question, when the incident had occurred,
(Rs. 25 lakhs were allegedly offered by a team mate in Sri Lanka
in 1994), I had informed the concerned persons and had then been
told that I should play my game and that they would do the
needful. (Letter dated 16th June 1997, to the Secretary BCCI).
(iii) The contents of the article (published in Outlook dated
June 11, 1997) are correct.
(iv) I have come to know this now that the very people I had told
(offer of Rs.25 lakhs), would probably have finished me.
(Interview to Zee TV in the Aap Ki Adalat programme telecast on
15th June 1997 and also reported in The Statesman dated 15th June
1997).
(v) I do not want to hide. I do not want to hide anyone. I want
to say that even if I blame these people, there will be no
problem for them. (Interview to Zee TV and also reported in The
Statesman dated 15th June 1997).
(vi) It is for the benefit of the country that I have raised this
question. What do you want that I blame somebody and if I cannot
prove it, will you fight my case? Either you say that we will
follow you, we will back you up. I will take the names. I will
take each and every name. (Interview to Zee TV in the Aap-Ki-
Adalat programme telecast on 15th June 1997 and also reported in
the Statesman dated 15th June 1997).
2. I find it very difficult to accept any of the aforesaid
statements made by Manoj Prabhakar. First and foremost, there
appears to be no plausible reason why he slept over such
important episodes, for six years in one case and for three years
in the other.
3. The incident mentioned in clause (a) above is falsified by the
statement of Sanjay Manjerekar, which I accept as true. He says
that the match at Sharjah against Pakistan in October 1991
started late. He and Manoj Prabhakar were on the right path when
the umpire said that the light was bad. There was only a brief
stoppage in the game. Manjrekar has stated categorically that he
and Manoj did not go back to the Pavilion and the statement made
by Manoj Prabhakar is wholly untrue. Manjrekar's statement
accords with the probabilities of the case.
4.The incidents mentioned in clause (c) and (d) above are couched
in a language which is beautifully vague. The incident mentioned
in clause (c ) speaks of "certain quarters" having approached
Manoj Prabhakar "somewhere" with a request that he should perform
below par in "a certain match". The incident mentioned in clause
( d) speaks of Rs. 25 lakhs being offered to Manoj Prabhakar by
an "Indian team member" for sabotaging the match in favour of
Pakistan. He says that he spurned the offer but that did not stop
the offers which flowed in regularly. Surely if an Indian team
member approached Manoj Prabhakar with such a highly
objectionable offer, the first thing which should have occurred
to him was to report the matter forwith to the Manager or the
Coach or the Captain or the vice-captain or any other member of
the team in whom he had confidence.
5. The incident mentioned in clause (e) above refers to a match
against West Indies. Nayan Mongia is alleged to have conveyed to
Manoj Prabhakar the "Management's instruction to try and get as
close to the target". Even here Manoj never claimed that he was
victimised for carrying out the instructions of The Management.
Nayan Mongia has said in his statement that he has never
experienced the fixing of a match as a member of the Indian team.
In fact he says that it is "crazy" that any player will make an
attempt to lose a match.
6. The incident mentioned in clause (g) shows Manoj's total
unconcern for truth. Aamir Sohail and Azhar were never captains
of their teams at the same time or in any match whatsoever. They
never tossed together. Azhar tossed with Imran Khan, Wasim Akram
and Moin Khan but never with Amir Sohail. Apart from that, it is
puerile for seasoned campaigners like Aamir Sohail and Azhar to
proclaim within the seeing of a couple of commentators that the
other had won the toss. Now, of course, the Referee is present at
the toss but all along, a couple of commentators have always been
present at an arm's length. The allegation made by Manoj in this
behalf is so completely concocted that it deserves no further
attention except that this allegation shows that Manoj has no
regard for truth whatsoever. In his zeal for involving Azhar,
Manoj overlooked that the Managers, the coaches and members of
the two teams would not have been silent spectators to such an
absurd claim made by their respective captains.
7. The target of allegation in clause (h) above is obviously
Azharuddin. I do not know from where Manoj got the figure of 5000
Dirhams which is said to be the price of the suit. I will have
occasion to point out later that the members of the Indian team
are now paid so handsomely by the BCCI that a costly suit or an
expensive watch can not be regarded as the offspring of a bribe.
8. It is not easy to understand what Manoj means by saying in
clause in clause (1) above that it is better to approach an explayer than a current player of the team. In fact, this
allegation destroys the other allegations made by him. On his own
showing he was approached more than once with an offer of bribe.
Why was that done, if the same result could be achieved more
easily by getting an ex-player? It is not a happy thought, but
the very persistence and tenor of the allegations made by Manoj
tend to show that, rightly or wrongly, the alleged bribe givers
entertained the belief that Manoj was the right person for paying
a bribe to.
9. The statements made by Manoj which are extracted at (1)-(5)
above are not of a different genre than those which are already
dealt with. He told the Statesman that in the bathroom of Indian
Cricket everyone is naked. This is too sweeping a statement to
merit acceptance, apart from being bad in taste. Then he says in
his letter dated 16th June 1997 to the secretary BCCI that he had
informed "the concerned persons" about the offer of bribe of Rs
25 lakhs. It defies understanding as to why Manoj is afraid of
disclosing the names even of those "concerned persons" , by which
is evidently meant the officials of the board or the manager the
captain and so on. There was surely no danger to his life in
disclosing those names.
10. The fundamental objection of Manoj to disclosing the names of
persons who offered him bribes or asked him to play below his
form is that such a disclosure will spell danger to his life. He
said in his statement before me that he was warned that his life
will be in danger if he disclosed the names. I pleaded with him
that he may dislose the names to me in confidence and that I will
not mention those names in my report, much that he disclosed
those names to me. Faced with this situation he changed his
stance, an adroit player that he is and said that he is afraid
that he will be sued or persecuted if he disclosed the names.
With my humble experience at the bar and on the bench, I told him
how unfounded his fear was. But he stuck to his crease for
concealing those names. This indeed is an easy exercise. Make any
unfounded allegations you like against team-mates, officials and
others and then try to get away with it by saying that the names
of the culprits cannot be disclosed because there is danger to
life or the fear of litigation.
11. I have no hesitation in rejecting the allegations made by
Manoj Prabhakar. They are imaginary and unrealistic. The question
naturally arises as to why he should have resorted to tactics
like these. The answer is provided by his own peers. According to
them Manoj lost his equipoise because firstly, to quote his own
words, he was " thrown out of the Indian team". That deprived him
of the opportunity to make handsome gains by the use of his
unquestioned cricketing talents. Secondly. he was then discarded
by his own home team the Delhi District Cricket Association. That
definitely unhinged him because, having been a hero of the crowds
for quite some years, he was relegated into oblivion. From the
admiring eyes of countless fans to a dark room is a fall too big
to bear even for the most philosophical. He then tried to open a
new leaf in his life by contesting an election to the Parliament.
He rushed in where angels fear to tread and lost his wicket like
a tail-ender. That was the last straw which broke the brave back.
Almost every player and Manager who was interviewed by me spoke
of Manoj as an impulsive, indisciplined and aggressive
individual. All those who said this added that there can be no
doubt that there can be no doubt that he was a lion-hearted
player who was always on the kill and did his utmost for the
team. It is to be regretted that a player of Manoj's calibre was
not able to curb his immature and uninformed impulses. Cricket
made him an idol of the crowds. Everyone regarded him as a fine
allrounder. It is tragic that he should have made untrue
allegations which are calculated to dilute if not to destroy, the
glorious uncertainity, the fun, the charm and the camaraderie of
a great game. The greatest harm he has done is to his own image
as a key player in the team. Cricket, I believe will take care of
itself. It is too deeply rooted in our lives and too widely liked
and loved to be damaged or destroyed by unexamined outbursts of
misguided individuals.
13. One of the questions referred to me relates to an article
published in "The Pioneer" in its issue dated 19th April 1997.
Shri. Pradeep Magazine, the Sports Editor of Pioneer was
interviewed by me.
14. Shri Pradeep Magazine has made the following statements in
his article:-
a) A person who claimed to be from Delhi offered him Rs. 40 lakhs
if he could get top players of the Indian team fixed for him.
b) He stumbled into this man at Jamaica Airport. They got
friendly. They spent 2 evenings together and the talk veered
around to betting. The man confessed he had been to Australia, to
South Africa and to England even when India were not involved in
matches there.
c) As the friendship grew, the man told him how some Indian
players had made money by fixing matches and how bookies and
betters were racking in the money by manipulating the odds. Mr.
Magazine told him that he was very close to a few of the players.
The man said- Can you get Sachin Tendulkar and I will give you 40
peties or buy you a house in a posh South Delhi locality. Shri.
Magazine told him that he will try which pleased him so much that
he made another offer to him like this: "I know it will take you
time to get these players fixed for me. In the mean time, I want
to benefit from your expertise. I'm going back to Delhi, would
you let me know each day of the test match, what the weather is
like, how the wicket is to behave and which team has a better
chance to win. I will pay you for this. I agreed. He agreed to
pay me Rs. 15,000 for each test and one-day match. He promised
that the money would reach my home each day against phone calls.
As phone calls came from Delhi, I did tell him conditions here
and the money did reach my home.
d) The story is based on a personal experience which Shri.
Magazine had with a bookie. (Letter dated 9th May, 1997,
addressed to the Secretary,BCCI).
15. Shri. Pradeep Magazine said in his statement before me that
when he mentioned the incident of the bribe for Rs. 40 lakhs to
Sachin Tendulkar, Sachin got furious and said that he thought it
beneath his dignity to even talk about such a thing. Shri.
Magazine further said in his statement that the episode shows
that at least the bookies believe that it is possible to fix a
match through proper contacts. Though Shri. Magazine has further
stated he would not be surprised if he came to know that some
matches with India are fixed, he had "no evidence to show that
any matches have been fixed".
16. The article of Shri. Magazine and the statement which he made
before me show that it is quite possible that bookies try to get
at players in whatever team. But then, one cannot ignore the
healthy reaction of Sachin Tendulkar. I am inclined to hold that
Sachin's reaction is representative of the reaction of the Indian
players, by and large. Further, Shri. Magazine has not disclosed
the name of the person who offered him Rs. 40 lakhs, though, on
his own showing, he got friendly with him, spent two evenings
with him and their talk veered around betting.
17. Shri. Pradeep magazine's story in the Pioneer cannot be
discounted as untrue as since he has no reason to make up a false
story. I did not get the impression when I was interviewing him
that he was prevaricating or narrating an incident specially
coined for the gullible reader. But what Shri. Magazine has said
neither helps to identify the bookie nor involves any particular
player or players in the Indian team. Shri. Pradeep Magazine has
rightly said that the bookies, on their own part, believe that
matches can be fixed. Fortunately, the belief of bookies does not
determine the rules and regulations of an orderly life.
18. Thus, though Shri. Pradeep Magazine's article in the Pioneer
may show that the bookies try to get at players, even Indian
players, it is not possible to hold on the basis of that article
that or the statement made by Mr. Magazine before me that any
particular Indian player or players lay bets, participate in
fixing matches or deliberately perform below their form and
ability.
That disposes of question (a) mentioned in the Reference to which
the answer is in the negative, namely that the allegations made
by Manoj Prabhakar as published in "The Outlook" in its issue
dated 11th June 1997 are not true.
19. The next three questions, (b), (c) and (e) relate to the
allegation of betting and match fixing by any Indian cricketer,
BCCI officials, team officials, journalists or any other persons
as alleged in "The Outlook" dated 11th June 1997 and in the issue
of "Pioneer" dated 19th April 1997.
20. The answer to these questions are provided in clear terms by
the various players, managers and journalists. The best way of
dealing with these questions is to extract the relevant part of
the statements made by them before me.
A. Sachin Tendulkar
I do not believe that matches are fixed or can be fixed. While
playing the game of cricket, you never know what is in store for
you, as you know in an examination, when you have read your books
and answered the questions. There is no prescribed syllabus in a
sport. There are surprises galore. Within my knowledge, no match
has ever been fixed. I never got the feeling that any of my
teammates deliberately played a bad shot to get out. Speaking for
myself, I'm so made that I decide to take an occasional risk
which works most of the time but fails occasionally. A batsman
who can deliberately get out, would indeed be a super technician.
He will use this expertise for playing well, rather than for
getting out. We now make such handsome money merely by playing
for the country , that it would be suicidal for any player to
play badly deliberately. For example, between May 1996 and May
1997, we played 15 international matches for which each of us
received a sum of about Rs 40 lakhs from the BCCI. I feel it
impossible to believe that nay player would risk being dropped
out of the team for deliberate bad play and lose not only the
honour of playing for the country but the opportunity to earn so
much money by lawful means.
B. Mohammed Azharuddin
I do not think that any match can be fixed. It has taken me
fourteen long years to build up some reputation as a player. I
cannot think of destroying it by playing badly with a deliberate
motive.
I do not know if there is betting on cricket. But, I know this
for certain that none of my team mates bet.
C. Nayan Mongia
Matches are not fixed at all. I've been playing test cricket
since November to December 1993. I came to know about the
expression "fixing of matches" from newspapers only. As a member
of the Indian team, I have never experienced it. The truth is
that we are playing so much cricket these days, that there are
more ups and downs in individual performance now than before. In
1996-97, we played 30-35 one-dayers and 11-12 test matches. We
were away from home for about five months.
I think it crazy that any player will bet to lose. I have never
heard even a whisper of it from any team mate. We spend years and
years to train ourselves and are lucky to be selected in a
national team. Then to think that we will bet to lose makes no
sense. Thereby, we will ruin and sacrifice all that we have
achieved.
We earn about Rs. 40 lakhs a year officially from the BCCI. In
addition, we make quite some money in other lawful ways as in
advertisements. There is no need to look beyond it. The team
meets very often, we are together for long hours, we discuss our
strategy, but never,never, is there even a whisper of fixing a
match or of betting.
D. Ajay Jadeja
Fixing a match requires a great amount of homogeneity which is
not to be found in a pronounced manner in our team. The team is
composed of players from different parts of India and they have
not much in common between them. It is not as if, we are not
friendly to each other. But, we do not know each other so
intimately that any one or two of us can take other players into
confidence and fix a match. People watch the game of cricket for
the thrill of its uncertainty. It is ironical that whoever does
not do well, is presumed to be bought over and it is, as if the
match is played by the bookies and not by us.
When you are included in a test team, you think only of your
performance and not of money. Cricket is a religion in India and
if the numerous spectators even suspect that a player takes a
bribe to play badly, they will boycott him and destroy him and
his family socially.
A match can be fixed by getting at the star players in the team.
But, even tail-enders have turned the fortunes of a game as
happened in the match which was played on 10th October 1997
between Pak and South Africa.
Some figures are interesting. A great player like Gavaskar, who
scored 130 centuries in first class matches was out for a duck on
20 occasions. In his last match, Gavaskar needed only four runs
to bid farewell with a century. But he was out for 96. That is
exactly what happened to Sir Don Bradman, the greatest of us all.
I believe that people bet on cricket. But a player can make far
more money by playing well and winning a match than by playing
badly and losing a match. In fact, if a player has some class, he
will bet to win, so that he wins the bet and makes additional
money because of his performance. Our style of living has changed
significantly which leads to various guesses and allegations.
People think that we must be making money by illegal means, since
we live so well. They do not know that the tax people us will
not allow it to go unnoticed and that, we are paid handsomely as
members of the team.
I do not think that in today's Indian team, there is any player
who bets on the game. It is true that one time, friends used to
have access to the players' enclosure and sometimes they used to
speak on mobile phones. Now, mobiles are not allowed after we
leave our hotel. No friends are allowed in the players'
enclosure, much less in the dressing room. The dressing room is
an exclusive place meant for the use of the players.
E. Sunil Gavaskar
I was shocked, surprised and saddened to know of the allegation
that some of our players are involved in betting of the game. I
think that it is impossible to fix a match. In my fairly long
experience, which has fortunately, not ended with my retirement
from the game, I have never known that nay match was fixed. You
cannot fix a match by buying over a couple of players. The fifth
wicket partnership of Azhar and Jadeja of about 230 runs in the
one-day match at Sri Lanka was a fantastic performance.
Some people are firing shots in a dark room to hit someone. But,
there is no one in the room. So the shots only damage the room.
That room is Indian cricket. Today, it is a dark room because we
are not in a winning streak. When we win, there are lights here,
lights there and lights everywhere. I feel that the allegations
of betting and match fixing are being made today because we are
not good enough to win at the present moment, for whatever
reason. Anyway, if Manoj Prabhakar had a story up his sleeve, he
could have approached his captain, vice-captain, coach or team
manager which he never did. I do not believe his story.
F. Kapil Dev.
In my entire career as a player, I was never approached by anyone
for match fixing. I guess that there is large betting on cricket
but, the evil of betting can be dealt with only by the Police.
Today, there is so much betting that there is so much betting
also. Those who lose their bets are the first to blame the
players for playing deliberately.
Fixing a match does not mean fixing all the players in the team.
It is possible to approach a couple of star players and fix a
match. A player can be approached only for playing badly because
not even a Don Bradman or a Sunil Gavaskar could claim that he
will score a century. A player can only promise that he will get
out cheaply. But in my experience no match was fixed.
Many players try to get friendly with players to increase their
importance. They are the ones who circulate all kinds of
stories. But, it cannot be denied that they offer gifts to
players. They also try to get information from the players on the
basis of which, I guess, they may be laying bets.
If they win, they would go back to the player and offer a gift
saying that they have won a bet because of the information given
to them.
I am of the opinion that the Board should set up a private agency
to find out the assets of the players. That will give some clue
whether players lay bets or agree to fix matches.
G. Ajit Wadekar
During my long term as a manager and even a longer term as a
player, I never suspected that any player was involved in
betting. But, as a Manager, I felt that the priorities of the
players were all wrong. They attended too many parties and mixed
with too many outsiders just to keep their own allowances intact.
Their attention is not all focussed on the game of cricket. I,
therefore, framed a code of conduct regarding dress, net
practice, general discipline and the need to hold discussions.
Thereafter, in England, we won 14c out of 21 matches, three were
drawn and only four were lost during my managership. While I was
captain, we won 3 out of 4 series. At one stage, I wanted to
relax the Code, but the players themselves said no to it. They
said the code is excellent and it works.
There is no betting by any Indian cricketer. It is out of the
question. They are so well paid that they do need any money.
The episode of offer of Rs.25 lakhs narrated by Manoj Prabhakar
has no foundation in fact. I was the manager of the team at that
time. But, he did not tell me a word about it. Besides, it was
raining for three days before the match and the match was never
played. Even the replay was washed out.
These days, players make a lot of money. People are probably not
aware that Azhar has a contract of Rs.50 lakhs with Pepsi, Sachin
has a contract running into crores with Worldtel, Kumble has a
contract Rs.20 lakhs, Siddhu has a contract of Rs.20 lakhs, Rahul
Dravid has a contract of Rs.30 lakhs for the stickers of Wills on
his bat and so on. I believe that Azhar has also a contract with
Reebok for Rs.40 lakhs. According to me, Azhar is basically a
simple person but he is friendless. Some undesirable persons have
invaded the cricket field and have ruined it by playing politics.
Finally, I would like to say that though the members of the
Indian team are not unfriendly to each other, very few of them
are close and intimate. Differences in language, culture,
religion and food habits make the Indian team not easy to manage.
A team with such diverse attitudes can not either be fixed by
anyone.
H. Dilip Vengsarkar
I had never heard of the word match fixing while I was in the
team. It was a matter of great pride and honour for me to play
for my country. We always played to win. I played actively from
1976-1992.
Knowing the Indian team, it seems to be impossible that any of
our players can be purchased to perform badly. The achievement of
scoring a large number of runs in a representative match has no
substitute. I believe that you can not fix a match unless you get
at least five or six players in your trap. Even two or three good
players can not fix a match. People may have forgotten that
Srinath and Kumble won for India the Titan cup against Australia
by playing brilliantly as tail-enders. The umpires play a large
part in the fortunes of the game. I believe that for fixing a
match, even the umpire may have to be fixed. What people must not
forget is that even the best of players go through a lean patch.
I. Sanjay Manjrekar
I do not have any first hand knowledge about betting on cricket
matches. It is only during the last four years that I have heard
stories about betting on cricket. But, even then, I have never
heard any stories about betting from any of my team mates. As a
member of the team, I never even suspected that there was betting
on cricket or any of my team mates were involved in it. My test
career began in 1987.
As regards match fixation, cricket is a team game of 11 players.
It is not possible to influence all of the 11 players through one
or two players by bribing them. Even one failure for a batsman
like me, with lakhs of people watching the game, means much more
than getting out deliberately on payment of a bribe.
The statements made by Manoj Prabhakar are wholly untrue.
It is well know that matches have been won by tall-enders often
times. Chetan Sharma won the game for us by scoring a century in
the MRF World Series at Kanpur. That makes match fixing difficult
to believe.
J. Ashok Mankad:
It seems to me that there is betting on cricket. However, I am
not aware of any cricketer, past or present, being involved in
betting. I was a manager of the team twice, first in 1986 and
then in 1991. I retired from my test career in 1978. In my
opinion, no cricketer worth his salt will entertain the thought
of selling himself at the cost of the country's honour. The price
of the Indian Test-cap cannot be measured in terms of money
because; it is bought with tears and sweat. My father, Vinoo
Mankad who was one of the greatest players of his time, used to
say that the grass on the cricket field is grown with the sweat
of the cricketers.
The statements made by Manoj Prabhakar are wholly untrue and
unfounded. He should not be afraid of disclosing the names of his
teammates who offered the bribe to him. He has defamed the entire
cricket fraternity with his unwarranted remarks. The Sharjah
Match of which he speaks did not take place at all. Besides, it
was an inconsequential match since India had reached the finals.
K. Chandu Borde
I captained the Indian team at Adelaide in 1958. I was the
manager of the team, which toured Pakistan in1989. I was chairman
of the selection committee for seniors for four years and for
juniors for four years. I was the vice-captain of the team and
have toured all cricket-playing countries as a player.
Though I retired a long time back from first-class cricket, I am
still in touch with the game. I take active interest in the game,
meet many players, old and new, and exchange thoughts with them.
Not one person has ever told me that any member of the cricket
team takes a bribe to play badly. No one has ever told me that
Indian matches are fixed. I follow the game closely even today
and my experience belies the story that any cricket match is
fixed. The story of Manoj Prabhakar seems to be impossible to
believe.
L. Sandeep Patil
I played as a member of the Indian team from 1979 to 1986. I was
a cricket coach for the Indian team from 18th March 1986 to Sept.
1996. Our team played as Singapore for six days, for one week at
Sharjah, for 70 days in England, for 10 days in Sri Lanka and for
10 days in Toronto. I assisted Ajit Wadekar in Nov.1995 with the
New Zealand home series and I was coordinator during the world
cup series, which ended on 17th March 1996.
I have seen one of the leading players in the Indian team talking
on the mobile phone right through the tour for long periods like
20 minutes from the balcony of the Lords dressing room. I wrote
to the board that players should not be allowed to take mobile
phones with them once they leave the hotel. My suggestion was
readily accepted. I had also complained to Mr. Jagmohan Dalmia
that I suspected two persons, one of them a player and other
closely connected with him, were leaking important information to
the press. I was also unable to understand why Dr. Ali Irani was
allowed to attend the team meetings on the eve of the match or at
any time.
I have experienced that the press knew the composition of the
team before the team was officially declared.
There can be betting on cricket on the basis of information
leaked to the bookies. But, my long experience shows that no
Indian player has ever laid a bet to loose a match. It has never
happened and I am sure that it'll never happen in the future.
People are given to talk loosely. Such rumours began to rise with
the introduction of the mobile phones and with at least one of
the key players talking on the mobile from the balcony of the
dressing room. Those who saw that drew the inference that the
player concerned was talking to some suspicious characters. Such
and inference is natural but I do not think that the inference is
justified. I repeat that no Indian player will ever bet to loose
a match. As the present editor of a fortnightly called 'Shatkar',
I am still in very close touch with the game. On the basis of my
experience I reject the allegation of match fixing.
M. Dr.D V Subba Rao
I was the manager of the Indian team, which toured West Indies
from Feb-May 1997.
Cricket is a game of uncertainty. Situation of sudden collapse of
a team arises quite often. In a one-day match in West Indies, we
had a target of 267 runs to achieve. We were 230 for three
wickets down. We lost 7 wickets for thirty runs and lost the
match by 16 runs. In the Barbados test, we wanted 121 runs to win
but we were all out for 80 runs. All the players uniformly
complained that the wicket was too bad to play.
Players do have many visitors but never in the dressing rooms and
generally not in the players enclosure. Occasionally a very
personal friend of a player sits in the player's enclosure. I
have not seen such persons speaking on mobile or looking very
informed.
My experience bellies the allegation of match fixing in Indian
cricket. You have to take at least two key batsmen and two key
bowlers in confidence to bet to loose a match. Players are on
friendly terms with each other. But I have never seen any
intimacy between them, which could enable them to conspire to
obtain a particular result. They share accommodation but the
players rotate and the same players will not share one room all
through the tour.
The talk of match fixing and betting started when we began to
loose matches. When we were on a winning streak, there was no
such talk. The emergence of a brilliant young player like
Jayasurya caused our defeat in many games and with it the talk of
match fixing started. It is difficult to contain a batsman like
Jayasurya. I fact, in respect of our own great opener K Srikant,
Allan Border had said, "Bowl anywhere you like. He will hit you
anywhere he likes." Unfortunately at this moment, the Indian team
is not adequately equipped to perform well. We have no Lala
Amarnath, Vinoo Mankad, Chandu Borde, Bapu Nathkarni, Saleel
Durani or Eknath Solkar. Our players are very young and seem to
be playing with the fear that if the fail they will be out. I
find that the team lacks a sense of commitment, which is
necessary for winning matches. From the Prudential cup 1983 to
1987-88, we were in the winning streak under Kapil Dev. No one
talked of match fixing then. I do not believe that there is any
match fixing in Indian cricket or any Indian player bets to loose
a match.
N. Dr.Ali Irani.
I have been working as a physiotherapist with the Indian team
since 1987, when the reliance World Cup was played. The only
occasions when I did not go with the team as a physiotherapist
were to West Indies and Pakistan in 1989 and to New Zealand at
about the same time. It is impossible that any of the Indian
matches can be fixed or any of our players can be got at. There
is just no possibility of one player in the Indian team
influencing another player or other players. When the Indian team
won the series against England, West Indies and Sri Lanka between
1993-94 people started saying that West Indies took money and
lost matches. People are generally prone to forming opinions
after hearing the TV commentary. That is why they talk the same
way. If the TV were made mute, very few people will be able to
say or write any thing original. Cricket is not a sport but a
religion.
Sachin Tendulkar cannot accept defeat. He takes his cricket as
one takes to religion and he is the right person to lead the
team.
Psychologically, people are compulsive gamblers. There are some
who consult an astrologer on such piffling things as the number
of nails on shoes, the colour of the pants or the size of a neck
chain.
It is worth while inquiring as to how much amount can possibly be
paid to a player for purchasing him to play badly. Today, the
players get Rs.90,000/- for playing one-day matches and Rs.1.25
lakhs for playing a test. You have to pay bribes according to the
worth and the status of the bribe-taker. The players make 38 to
40 lakhs or rupees per year. How much can you the pay them?
Rahul Dravid has a contract of Rs.50 lakhs with Pepsi but such
contracts can be entered in to and maintained as long as you are
in the team.
The outburst of Manoj Prabhakar is unfounded. He is by and large
a friendless person.
O. Mr.Sunil Dev
Betting on cricket takes place heavily in India. It has been
there for about 10 years. It has assumed a large proportion since
the introduction of one-day games. There is heavy betting on oneday matches because they are result oriented. I cannot identify
any particular player, who bets on cricket but I ma fairly
certain that members of the team do lay a bet, "and one can only
bet to loose." It is easy to get run-out or hit a lofted shot.
Coaches can detect a deliberate under performance and so can the
students of the game. We may have lost some matches because some
of our players laid bets to lose.
Matches can be and are fixed but they can be fixed only for
losing, not for winning. No one can fix a match for winning it.
From Sept. 1996 to Sept. 1997, each of the 14 players in the
team, including the coach must have earned over Rs.50 lakhs,
which consist only of what the board plays them. When the team
goes abroad, they get a daily allowance of 50 US $ per day. They
do not spend that money. They have a large number of fans; some
of them are highly placed and invite them for dinners. But, I can
say that the Indian team is a very disciplined, well-behaved lot
of players, most of whom live within their means.
The Board cannot do anything about disproportionate assets of the
players. But I have a feeling that one or two players have
acquired disproportionate assets. Out of the logo money, the
board keeps 40 per cent and distributes 60 per cent equally among
the players. Manoj Prabhakar wanted more money to be paid to the
senior members of the team. He was dropped not only from the
Indian team but he was not even include in his home Delhi team.
The story which he gave to OUTLOOK is not true.It only shows his
deep sense of frustration.
P. Mr Makrand Waingankar:
I am the sports correspondent of Sanj Loksatta. In 1993, I
covered the test match between India and England. Anyone could
enter the dressing room and I saw some shady characters hovering
around the dressing room. One of such persons is alleged to have
been arrested under TADA.I It's wrong to allow access to any
person to the dressing room.
The statements made by Manoj Prabhakar in ":Outlook" magazine are
false. I have been a close follower of cricket since 1965 but I
cannot think of any match which was fixed.
I am of the opinion that the fees paid to the players should be
linked with the performance as in Sri Lanka. If that is done
there would be no possibility of a match being fixed.
The statements made by the other journalists read thus:
Q. Mr Aniruddha Bahal, Outlook Principal correspondent.
A cricket match can be fixed. The results of the international
matches are in the present times so close that it is enough to
fix a few key players. It is not necessary to fix all the 11
players. The match can be fixed not merely by bookies even
punters can fix a match. Corruption is a matter of individual
susceptibility. A player who has scored a half century has
performed well for outward purposes but he may have scored those
runs in twice the number of balls when his potential is that he
can score 50 runs in 60 balls. Thus, it is difficult to find
fault with him by saying that he was involved with any bookie or
punter.Many permutations and combinations are involved in good
and bad play, that is, a bowler can bowl a few overs very well
and then slide off, similarly, the batsman or the wicketkeeper.
It is true that the report in our magazine outlook regarding the
match, of which Mr Prabhakar has spoken, never took place.Even
the adjourned match which was to be replayed did not take place.
That does not mean that Prabhakar's story is baseless.The reason
is that bets would be laid or the money can be offered when it
was not known or anticipated that the match will not be played.
There is a huge amount of betting in the sub continent. In my
opinion, there is a lot of betting on cricket in India.Indian
players may also be laying bets which does not necessarily mean
that they have laid those bets for fixing the match. But, if a
player lays a bet, he would naturally adjust his play so that he
can win that bet. No one lays a bet to loose it. The fact that
Indian players earn a higher amount legally through the board
does not mean that they would not be interested in making more
money. Its not every good player who makes large money in
advertisements or in TV modeling. There are just one or two of
that kind. Therefore, the others could well be tempted to make
money which is a human trait.
Whatever I have to say on match fixation or the particular
matches which were fixed is stated in the article in our magazine
"Outlook". What we could say openly has been stated by us. Things
which can not be published without good evidence have not been
published by us.
(Mr Bahal showed me a letter and a note suggesting match fixing
by Indian cricketers.The said letter says that "Lots of bits and
pieces of information" was received but was not actionable. The
letter says that "very peripheral information" was received from
" various sources". "If we had any basis we would have looked for
proof." The note speaks of a letter by which information was
handed over to a revenue secretary, and the letter could be found
of the record of the revenue department. Paragraph 3 of the note
says that the gentleman with whom the writer had a talk could not
remember the names regarding the involvement of four players who
alleged to have been paid of before a match in Sharjah.)
My information tends to show that there is a company in Singapore
which organise Singer Cricket tournament behind the scene and
that, an Indian board official was a beneficiary of the
proceedings along with three other persons who are closely linked
with cricket, one of whom is from Pakistan.
R. Mr Krishna Prasad, Outlook co-correspondent
Cricket is a subject of my study. I have personal motive in
writing the article which appeared in Outlook. I do not say that
every international Indian cricket match is fixed. Only some
matches are fixed. Outlook has not made any insinuation against
any board official even when matches are fixed not every
cricketer is involved in match fixing. Though betting on cricket
is legalised in England and Australia and partly in Sri Lanka ,
it is frowned upon. It is considered improper to bet.
The board should ask for a declaration from the players of the
assets. That may perhaps be too generic. But, one does not know
why the board did nit try to find whether the assets of some
players are wholly disproportionate to their known source of
income.
Manoj Prabhakar has brought in the forefront the virus which is
eating into the vitals of Indian cricket. Since March 1996,
Indian cricketers have been earning large amounts by way of fees.
Even then, the assets held by some players are staggering. It is
impossible to obtain and furnish proof in black and white of
illegal payments made to players. Those who make such payments
are highly placed individuals.
A tremendous amount of betting takes place in cricket. Dubai and
Karachi have the biggest cartels.
All types of queer characters sit in the players' box and have
access to the dressing room. Betting takes place not merely on
the final result of the match. There can be betting on the toss,
runs scored by a player, catches taken and dropped, the total
runs which the team scored and so on.
S. Mr. Lokendra Pratap Sahi Sports Editor, The Telegraph
I think it is possible to fix an international cricket match
involving any team. If you watch the matches closely, you will
find that some matches take a cetain turn either with the fall of
one wicket or even after a couple of overs only. There are some
runouts which cannot be explained and 2-3 players are getting out
one after the another.Shots which they play are such as they
should nothave been played in that situation. Some time you find
that some bowlers concede as many as 40-50 runs in three overs.
Thus the question arises as to why such a thing has happenned?
It is not fair to assume that all matches are fixed or that all
players in any particular match are fixed. It cannot be that
everyone in the team is fixed. It is the players who are crucial
to the side who can be fixed. Like an opening bowler, a key
player or even a wicket keeper. That possibility is always there.
When a match is fixed only one player is never fixed. It may be
2-3 crucial players who are fixed may get out. By getting out
they have done their job. That is say they have done whatever was
expected of them or asked of them. If the others pull out the
match and the side does well, that is bad luck for the bookies.
The bookies will not go for the fringe players in that case their
element of risk will increase. The bookies will always have the
key players as his target. That is what i believe.
I have been with daily Telegraph for 15 years. I am its Sports
Editor for past five years. I have toured with the Indian team
about 20 times, There was a one-day match between India and West
Indies,at Kanpur in 1994. I did not cover that. I sent one of my
colleagues to cover it. The way Manoj Prabhakar and Nayan Mongia
batted shocked everyone. The reports which appeared in the
newspapers next day almost unanimously doubted the integrity of
these two players. That is because, in one day match, they were
batting as if they were playing in a test match. That is the
first time i thought that there is some truth in the allegation
that players are involved with bookies. After that match, both
Prabhakar and Mongia were dropped out for the next two matches.
That was obviously by way of punishment. The general feeling was
that their omission from the next two matches had everything to
do with their involvement with the bookies.
In early 1995 I went to Sharjah. But before that there was a
tournament in New Zealand in which India took part. When the
Indian team returned the Indian Express carried a story on the
front page quoting the Manager of the Indian team which had
toured New Zealand, that the Indian team had six blacksheep.
That story talked about matches being fixed. For two days after
the story, there was no comment from the board. On the third day
the manger issued the statement from Vishakapatnam saying that he
was misquoted by the paper and that he had not given any
information to the Indian Express. The story in the Indian
Express had quoted the manager. Since the story in the said paper
was not denied immediately by the board or the Mnager i think
that there must have been some truth in the report. It is a queer
coincidence that the Salim Malik episode occured almost at the
same time in which Shane Warne and two other Australian players
alleged that S. Malik had offered them a bribe to ensure that
Australia lose the match.
After the Kanpur and New Zealand incidents, the public started
feeling and became more convinced that there must be some
underhand dealing between the players and the bookies.
In 1996, India played in Sahara cup at Toronto. I did not cover
that tournament. Therefore, I cannot say what happened during
that tour. But I was told by some people in Calcutta after the
first match that the first four matches in Toronto were fixed,
that the result will be two all and that, the fifth match will be
played on merit. As a coincidence, that is exactly what happened.
For that, both the teams had to cooperate and some players in the
Pakistan team may also have cooperated.
Recently , in some matches, the performance of some members of
our team has been shocking and far below expectations. While on
circuit, I felt that some players were just not bothered in
respect of their own poor and overall failure of the team. It
seemed to me as if they were not bothered about it. The fat
allowance paid to the Indian players is a recent phenomenon for
the last 5-7 years. It is the key player who is targeted by the
bookies. He has no fear. Even if he performs poorly for 3-4
matches, he will still be in the team. Being dropped from the
team, is what can happen to a fringe player for bad performance
but, the bookies never target them. The bookies invest in a
player who will be in the team even after 3-4 bad performances.
Therefore, a key player does not have much stake in being
involved with the bookies for some time at least. After 3-4 bad
performances, he may do extremely well and again become a hero
before the public. Public memory is very short and if a key
player makes a century or takes some wickets, his immediate past
poor performance is forgotten by the public.
The bookies target players in important matches where betting
stakes are enormous as in matches with Pakistan, West Indies,
South Africa , Australia and now Sri Lanka . In key matches,
especially with Pakistan, the betting can run into crores of
rupees. In England and South Africa, betting on cricket is
legalised. In England, there are Lad-broke stalls at all test
match centres where any one can bet openly. The odds are publicly
displayed on the board at those centres.
The Salim Malik incident took place in February 1995. Five months
later, in July 1995, the International Cricket Council , which is
the Governing body for cricket, outlawed betting and gambling in
the Code of Conduct which has to be followed by every player and
official. In fact, one clause was added to the code of Conduct.
Clause 9 of the ICC Code of Conduct was added in July 1995 which
provides, inter alia, that players and team officials shall not
engage, directly or indirectly in betting, gambling or any form
of unofficial speculation on the outcome of any cr4icket match.
I would like to emphasise that it is the key players who are
fixed and the key matches. There is no question of fixing a
fringe player nor can you fi all players. No bookie would be
interested in fixing a match which is unimportant. I am not
prepared to say that every player in the team is involved. All I
can say is that a couple of key players can be involved. What is
important is that a member of the Indian team may place a bet on
the result of the match, though he cannot do so because of Code
of Conduct. What is important and objectionable is the possible
involvement with the bookie and the deliberate poor performance.
A player in a team can supply more information to a bookie on the
composition of the team, an unpublished injury to a player, which
is only known to the team, or state of the wicket. Mobile phones
were banned in Pakistan in 1994-95 by the then Manager Inthikhab
Alam. The then Indian Manager, Sandeep Patil also banned mobile
phone in August 1996. The question naturally arises, why?
Conduct Clause 9 of the ICC Code of Conduct was added in July
1995 which provides, inter alia, that players and team officials
shall not engage, directly or indirectly in betting, gambling or
any other form of unofficial speculation on the outcome of any
cricket match. I would like to emphasise that it is the key
players who are fixed and the key matches. There is no question
of fixing a fringe player nor can you fix all players. No bookie
would be interested in fixing a match which is unimportant. I am
not prepared to say that every player in the team is involved,.
All I can say is that a couple of key players can be involved.
What is important is that a member of the Indian team may place a
bet on the of the match though, he cannot do so because of Code
of Conduct. What is important and objectionable is the possible
development with the bookies and the deliberate poor performance.
A player in a team can also supply more information to a bookie
on the likely composition of the team, an unpublished injury to a
key player, which is only known to the team, or state of the
wicket. Mobile phones were banned in Pakistan in 194-95 by the
then manager Intikhab A lam. The then Indian manager, Sandeep
Patil also banned mobile phones in August 1996. The question
naturally arises, why?
T. Bipin Dani - Free lance Sports Journalist: I say that cricket
matches can be fixed. There cannot be smoke without fire. I
believe that international Indian cricket matches are fixed.
Newspaper reports say that bookies have been arrested. It cannot
be false that they are not involved. The bookies will not take
bets unless they involve cricketers. Fixing up a match means
setting at a few good players. Each and every match cannot be
fixed. A match can be fixed by contacting key players. The key
players are asked to tell the other players to perform poorly. I
have no evidence in support of what I have stated. However,
there are some circumstances, which support my statement. Rashid
Latif had said that four Indian cricketers used to inquire with
him on telephone about climatic condition, wicket condition etc.
Latif denied this allegation immediately. However he did not
send his denial to the outlook magazine but sent it to
Azharuddin.
T. Balasaheb.J.Pandit
I do not believe that any International Indian Cricket match is
fixed. I also do not believe that any Indian player in such
matches takes part in fixing the match or in betting. I had
toured with the Indian team in 1971, 1974, and in 1979 to
England. I had also gone to Sri Lanka in 1974 and to Sharjah in
1987, when the Indian team played there. I have covered about 30
test matches on All India Radio and for newspapers. I came into
very close contact with the players, especially because in
England, I used to live in the same hotels they lived. I came
into personal contact with the players. I never suspected that
there was any match fixing or any betting by any Indian player. I
may site an example, which is very telling. At Oval in Sur-people
began to see something evil in the defeat of India. The truth is
that Pakistan won because Ijaz played magnificently. The players
do not take part in fixing matches because their whole reputation
and livelihood are at stake.
U. R.Mohan- The Hindu
I consider it impossible that the International Match can be
fixed. As many as 11 players are involved in the play and what is
more important, the national prestige is at stake. I have heard
many market rumours about match fixing. But during my 18 years as
a Cricket Correspondent with the Hindu, I do not know a single
instance when I heard before the match or during the match that
some particular player or players are going to play badly. These
rumours, I found are unfounded and they are circulated after the
match is over. A team, which loses, is accused of having fixed
the match to lose. I have no personal knowledge but. It is widely
believed that a large amount of betting takes place on cricket in
India. In some other countries, like England and Australia,
betting is legalised. Cricket is an unpredictable game because
fluctuations in the form of a player or a team are very common.
That is why unusual results are produced in any cricket match
between any two countries. Any cricket match can produce a
shocking result. When a shocking result is produced. Rumours
begin to float. The match with Pakistan in the Singer cup in 1994
at Colombo about which Manoj Prabhakar has spoken to thereby,
there was a betting lounge where the telephone was buzzing all
the time and bets could be led lawfully. I never found a single
Indian player in that enclosure. The Managers and the Coaches
were men of integrity who would have never allowed any match
fixation or betting by the players. The character of the Indian
players is reflected in the fact that when three of our players
had offers to play in the Packer circus world series cricket in
Australia, they refused the offer because, accepting the offer
would have meant that they cannot play for their own country.
People tend to believe involvement of players in betting because
of some unusual events, which happen during the course of the
match. For example, in the match between India and Pakistan at
Sharjah, Pakistan required six runs to win and there was only one
ball to go. Everyone was saying that Pakistan is going to win,
even before the match had started. Javed Miandad hit a six off
the last ball and Pakistan won the match. People began to say
that the Indian bowler deliberately bowled a full toss. This is
unjustified because, it is not easy to hit a six even on a full
toss. Cricket is a game involving tremendous amount of human
element. There is uncertainty in the game until the last ball is
bowled. That may encourage betting but that does not show that
players lay bets to lose a match. To take another illustration,
when India and Pakistan won one match each in Pakistan. The
result of the series depend on the last match. Pakistan won
because Ijaz Ahmed played extremely well and scored about 135
runs.The match with Pakistan in the Singer cup in 1994 at
Colombo, about which Manoj Prabhakar has spoken to Outlook, never
took place. In fact, it was raining for quite a few days before
the match was due to be played. The nature of the game is such
that any side may win or lose. No one ever thought that Kenya
would beat West Indies in the World Cup Championship, which was
held in 1996. Our match with West Indies in which we had to score
only 120 runs to win was lost because the wicket was difficult
and suited the West Indies fast bowlers. I have gone about five
time out of India with the Indian touring team from 1979 to 1997.
Not once did I suspect that any match was fixed or that any
player had placed a bet for losing the match
V. Mr.S.K.Shyam
I have been writing in various newspapers for the last 30 years.
I was a Sports Editor for nearly 26 years for three different
newspapers. I have covered 126 test matches, to which India was a
party and I have also covered about 100 one day matches. I have
traveled a lot for viewing and commenting on cricket. Some times,
the future of a match changes so suddenly that it creates doubts
in the minds of people about the bona fides of the players.
People jump to the conclusion that the match is lost because the
players are got at. But sports critics like us have to look into
these problems and try to analyse the likely causes of the
result. After a most careful consideration, I have come to the
conclusion that it is not only difficult but impossible to fix a
match through the medium of one or two players. In one day
cricket, even one or two failures of key batsman do not matter.
The others can make up for it, which has happened very often. For
fixing a match, one will have to get at a large bunch of players,
which is extremely difficult to do. Players are known to have
played badly, deliberately on a few occasions. But, that is
because of internal rivalries, especially some animus against the
Captain. I have come across people who boast of their friendship
with players. They exploit that friendship by spreading rumors
like that they placed a certain bet on behalf of that player. It
is very difficult to separate the facts from fiction. No player
would risk his whole career by being directly involved in an
illegal activity like betting on cricket. My own experience is
that the key players who have worked so hard to get into the team
and to retain their form, will not sell themselves because they
also consider it a great honour to represent their country. I am
of the opinion that in the interest of this great game of
cricket, people cannot be allowed to pass off or masquerade as
journalists. Those people never cover any match in detail but
manage to go on a tour abroad to cover a series. Thereby they get
privileges of a journalist like sitting in the Press Box where
all telecommunications are very easily available. I have seen
that the only business of these people is to receive and make
telephone calls. At the end of the day, they hardly write a line
on the cricket of the day. The entry to the journalists box
should be subjected to close scrutiny so that only genuine and
established journalists will have access to the press room. That
will effectively reduce the rumors about the journalists being
involved in betting
W. Pradeep Vijaykar, Asst. Editor- Sports- Times of India, Bombay.
I have gone twice to Sharjah and recently to Toronto and Pakistan
when the Indian cricket team was touring. I do not rule out the
possibility of fixing an international cricket match. That can be
done by getting at say, two key players. If the others play well,
the fixing may fail. But, where the fixing has been attempted,
50% of the times one may succeed in fixing the match. Punters do
not always win the bet. They take their chance and bookies seldom
lose because they hedge their bets. Therefore, a failed attempt
in fixing a match does not hit the bookies. I have watched the
Indian team closely for the last 20 years and I have seen today's
players growing from their early beginnings. I do not think that
they would take money for losing a match. There may be a stray
case here or there by way of an aberration. There are temptations
in all walks of life and, some times, some players find it
difficult to resist it. The test match which Pakistan lost
against Zimbabwe in about 1993 has all the trappings of a fixed
match. In some foreign countries where betting goes on lawfully
on a large scale on cricket, winners of bets are not even paid
their moneys. The bookies just do not part with the money.
Because of the betting rumors, it has become difficult to cover a
match because, if any side loses, the general public suspects
match fixing. It is very hard to swallow that our players will
take a bribe or bet to lose a match. Cricket cannot be compared
to horse racing where mafias rule the roost. In places like
Sharjah where money power plays a large part, there can even be
pressure on Umpires in fixing a match. Some times, even umpires
seem to give decisions, which shock the spectators and the
competitors alike.
X. Pradeep Magazine, Sports Editor- Pioneer, Delhi
I have gone on all major cricket tours abroad. In the last couple
of years, there is a tremendous amount of talk in the Press Box
and outside about a large amount of betting. I have myself seen
people sitting in the Press Box and talking on mobile phones to
outsiders on the state of wicket and the likely result of the
match. These phone calls used to come and go every few hours to
up date the information. This and other news like a bookie being
thrown out from a Press Room in Sharjah led to further rumors
that there is a communication between players and the bookies.
The news which appeared in the newspaper about the Sharjah
incident was in 1993-94. In 1983, when Kapil Dev was the captain
of the Indian team, I had written an article in the Indian
Express dated 17th December 1983, saying that Kapil Dev had said
to me that the Indian team was interested more in making money
than in playing the game. My article led to some controversy. But
the important point is that Kapil Dev had not said anything about
fixing a match or about betting. He was saying something about
players who were interested in gifts more than in playing the
game. Kapil Dev later on contradicted even that statement after a
few days.
Y. H.Natarajan, Sports Editor- Indian Express
I have been working in the Indian Express for the last 17 years.
There can be no smoke without fire. There should be some truth in
the rumor about the match fixing and the betting. But I have no
evidence with me on either of the questions. I cannot say that
any particular match was fixed or that, any particular player in
the Indian team bets. What I can say is that in 1994-95, when I
was in Sri Lanka at the same time of the Singer Cup Series, a
Pakistani photographer with whom I was sharing a room said to me
that lots of allegations and counter allegation are being made in
the Pakistani Dressing Room about the spectacular match of
Australia vs. Pakistan. Salim Malik was the Captain of the
Pakistan team. I had heard a few things about our players but it
would not very unfair on my part to mention their names because I
have no evidence. Some players have made allegations against
other players but even then I thought that our players against
whom allegations were so made, had an unimpeachable character. It
is surprising that such allegations were made by different
players at different times, evidently unrelated to each other.
But, I still do not believe those allegations. For fixing a
match, it is quite enough to get at two key bowlers and batsmen.
Managing a run out is not very difficult. But, it is very
difficult to say without any concrete evidence that Indian
matches are fixed or any particular match was fixed. When strange
things happen on the field, suspicion is naturally aroused.
Coupled with the established fact of large betting, such
incidents then tend to give credence to match fixing allegations.
The umpire can also be a key figure in match fixing, though it is
not known way of doing it. I do not know whether that is
prevalent. But I can say that an Indian international umpire told
me once that he was offered money to give certain decisions. But
all these allegations depend on the oral word and there is no
concrete evidence. In the absence of such evidence, it would be
unfair for me to make any positive statement, either on the
question of match fixing or on the involvement of our players in
betting. But there is no question that a large amount of betting
takes place on cricket matches.
21. This then is the state of "evidence" before me. Taking all
relevant circumstances and the broad probabilities of the case
into account, particularly the Indian conditions of which I may
be assumed to be intimately aware. I accept without hesitation
the statements of Sachin Tendulkar, Mohammad Azharuddin, Nayan
Mongia , Ajay jadeja, Sunil Gavaskar, Kapil Dev , Ajit Wadekar
,Dilip Vengsarkar, Sanjay Manjrekar, Chandu Borde ,Sandeep Patil,
D.V.Subba Rao, Dr.Ali Irani , Mukarand Waigankar, Balasaheb J.
Pandit , R Mohan ,S.K. Shyam and Pradeep Vijaykar.
22. So far as the other persons whose statements were recorded by
me are concerned, who are mostly journalists even they have not
been able to identify any particular player or players in the
Indian team as being parties to match fixing or who bet on
cricket .These journalists ,undoubtedly respectable and
unmotivated , have drawn their own inferences on the general
situation which now obtains the game of cricket. All of these
inferences are not unjustified because I am also inclined to
believe that a large amount of betting takes place on cricket in
India. That is what the Howrah superintendent of police Mr
Purokayastha told me and, more specifically than that , that is
what one of the top officials of Bombay police told me over the
phone. But even they said that it has not been possible for their
investigating teams to identify any player or players in the
Indian team who lay bets on cricket.
23. In so far as the involvement of the journalists in betting or
match fixing is concerned, there is equally no credible evidence
to justify their implication. Fortunately, mobile phones are
banned but the press box is fitted with sophisticated gadgets of
communication which are capable of being misused. Some
journalists have themselves spoken before me of such misuse. One
of them has suggested that the entry to the Press Box should be
screened properly, a suggestion which I endorse. That may atleast
help remove a plausible cause of suspicion in the minds of the
general public that there is something rotten in the kingdom of
cricket.
24. Accordingly, my answer to question (b), (c) and (e) is that
the data before me does not show that any Indian player, official
or journalist has ever taken part in match fixing or that any of
them lays bets on cricket for the purpose of match fixing so as
to lose a match. There is, undoubtedly, large scale betting on
cricket but that is law and order problem. Betting, like drinking
is a common human weakness since the beginning of the world. One
cannot, therefore, rule out the possibility that some Indian
players may be laying the flutter of a bet. But, it is less than
just to conclude that lay bets for losing a match. Such a charge
lacks substance and is unjustified.
25. What remains for consideration is question (d). The question
is whether Shri Ajit Wadekar put tap on telephones of Indian
cricketers after their return from the South African tour and ,if
so, whether such tapping is permissible in law.
26 The answer to the last part of the question is self evident.
Tapping of phones by a private individual, be he the manager of
the cricket team is illegal. On the question whether Ajit Wadekar
tapped the phones, I am inclined to accept the explanation given
by him before me, which he seems to have given the Press also.
The original fax dictated by him contained the word "tap". Ajit
has said in his statement before me that he did not tap the
telephone of any player. I consider it hardly likely that a man
of such wide and large experience like Ajit Wadekar will indulge
in the gimmick of tapping the phones of the players. I answer
this question accordingly.
27. Before concluding I must express my thankfulness to the
officers and staff of the BCCI who extended the necessary
facilties and courtesies to me. But more than that I will be
failing in my duty if I did not record my deep appreciation of
the cooperation extended to me by the players, the managers and
journalists alike. Not one of them who was invited to speak
declined to come. Not only that, every one of them showed quite
an amount of enthusiasm for making the best use of the
oppurtunity afforded to them. It was transparent that they were
all actuated by one common objective, namely to save the fair
name of the game called cricket. There were just a few specks of
dust here and there as they rise from a worn wicket but there was
no mud slinging by any one at all. They told me the truth as they
honestly perceived it. That is why I must express my special
sense of thankfulness to them. It would have been well nigh
impossible for me to complete my task without the cooperation of
all these gentlemen. I am sure that with all the good intentions
of so many well-informed persons, the game of cricket will
survive in India and the rumors of match fixing will die a
natural death. It wil be a sad day if the common men and women,
on whose support the game has occupied a pride of place, will
stay away, believing that the bookies, not the chosen eleven,
play the game.
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD
Dated: 17th November, 1997.