Mohammed Amir cleared to return with immediate effect

[TNT]

And in any case what Amir did wasn't "throwing the match" in any way. He was asked to bowl a few no-balls that would probably have had no impact on the match really. It still goes against the integrity of the sport because now whenever bowls no-balls repeatedly there will always be people wondering whether it was done deliberately.

There is an impact from what Amir did, he allowed a bookie to defraud people of their money and Amir got some of that money by bowling the no ball. In effect he stole money from people betting on the game.

 

[hendrix]

yes, that's right. But in terms of the effect on the actual game, it's rather minimal. The main consequence on the game is to do with the integrity in not trying your best at that point in time. Which if allowed to spread is every bit as cancerous as PEBs etc.

 

[Prince EWS]

pews just prefers doping to fixing because fixing ****s up his betting predictions

Thanks benchy.

 

[Swingpanzee]

There is an impact from what Amir did, he allowed a bookie to defraud people of their money and Amir got some of that money by bowling the no ball. In effect he stole money from people betting on the game.

I am not saying there was no impact. What I posted was that what Amir did had almost no impact on the result of the match. In any case, the bigger point I was making was that both fixing and doping are equally corrupt and detrimental to the sport.

 

[TNT]

I am not saying there was no impact. What I posted was that what Amir did had almost no impact on the result of the match. In any case, the bigger point I was making was that both fixing and doping are equally corrupt and detrimental to the sport.

No there is a big difference, doping is breaking the code of the sport, spot fixing is a criminal offence on top of breaking the code of the sport.

 

[Daemon]

Doping is a bit like chucking, but more extreme. Fixing involves money and a lot of other stakeholders. It's quite clear which is the worse crime to me.

 

[Daemon]

As a player, I would rather my opponent attempt to cheat to win than throw the match to lose. The former makes victory taste sweeter and allows me an excuse if I lose. The latter makes all my efforts futile. My five wicket haul, my century, my match-winning performance...suddenly it holds no value when I realise my opponent wasn't even trying to beat me. And if I fail when my opponent was attempting to throw the game...well that just sucks even harder.

Erm, but what if you're a fringe player struggling to keep your spot and your career suffers because one of your teammates has been doping and got ahead of you? Or someone in the opposition has been taking drugs and gets that extra bit of power in his throw to run you out?

My point is that you can argue for yourself that you'd still feel better than if the opposition was underperforming, but it doesn't apply to everyone.

 

[G.I.Joe]

There is an impact from what Amir did, he allowed a bookie to defraud people of their money and Amir got some of that money by bowling the no ball. In effect he stole money from people betting on the game.

I'd rather a cricketer steal money from people betting on the game than defraud the people paying to actually watch it. The latter group are far more integral to the survival of the game. Obviously it's not that clear-cut a dichotomy because fixing and doping defraud both groups anyway.

 

[Furball]

I actually did struggle to think of a good cricket example. When I've made the argument in the past it's been on rugby league forums and used the examples of making a tackle when you're offside and raking the ball out in the ruck; they really are outright cheating acts that happen countless times every game, whereas the cricket examples I gave really aren't as such.

Obviously some cheating is more damaging than other cheating, and I've got no problems with much, much stiffer punishment for things like performance-enhancing drugs than in-game sports cheating, but I don't think we have to get sanctimonious about it. Cheating is part of professional sport and sportsmen will do what they think they can get away with, or what they think is worth the risk, to advance the goals of their team. Actions have consequences and if they get caught, they get punished, but I don't think it's an outright moral issue like fixing. Fixing is not just risk/reward in pursuit of the same end goal as everyone else; it corrupts the whole fabric of the game by introducing perverse incentives and it should result in a life ban.

Claiming a catch you know has bounced would be a better example. Not walking when an umpire hasn't given you out isn't cheating.

 

[Niall]

A lot of counties understandably seem to be targeting the Asian market, could do worse than getting Amir, will cost buttons and will draw interest, Leicestershire especially should be looking at him.

 

[Flem274*]

i hope he doesn't get back in. i like the pakistani test team because they mix loveable with being good and well amir isn't exactly loveable.

because he's a cheat who should have a life ban.

 

[morgieb]

A lot of counties understandably seem to be targeting the Asian market, could do worse than getting Amir, will cost buttons and will draw interest, Leicestershire especially should be looking at him.

He also will have visa issues.

 

[TNT]

I'd rather a cricketer steal money from people betting on the game than defraud the people paying to actually watch it. The latter group are far more integral to the survival of the game. Obviously it's not that clear-cut a dichotomy because fixing and doping defraud both groups anyway.

It could not be more clear cut, one is a criminal offence the other is not. I respect your opinion is different but it is also factually wrong.

 

[Antihippy]

He also will have visa issues.

Isn't there a set time where he can't appear in england once he committed a criminal offence on english soil?

 

[G.I.Joe]

It could not be more clear cut, one is a criminal offence the other is not. I respect your opinion is different but it is also factually wrong.

It is clear cut from the viewpoint of the justice system and the courts are free to take action on the criminal aspects. However the ICC is a sporting body and their brief is the management of the game, including ensuring it's integrity; not concerning themselves with whether or not a bunch of bookmakers and their clients were defrauded.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

There is an impact from what Amir did, he allowed a bookie to defraud people of their money and Amir got some of that money by bowling the no ball. In effect he stole money from people betting on the game.

No one lost any money apart from NOTW.

The money paid was by Mazhar Mahmood, an undercover reporter and no bets were placed. The point was to demonstrate that Mazhar Majeed could control Pakistani players.

 

[Furball]

A lot of counties understandably seem to be targeting the Asian market, could do worse than getting Amir, will cost buttons and will draw interest, Leicestershire especially should be looking at him.

I'd be surprised if he could get a visa given his criminal conviction.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I'd be surprised if he could get a visa given his criminal conviction.

The Pakistani government will push for it if he is refused Visa, which could turn into a diplomatic mess.

 

[Daemon]

It is clear cut from the viewpoint of the justice system and the courts are free to take action on the criminal aspects. However the ICC is a sporting body and their brief is the management of the game, including ensuring it's integrity; not concerning themselves with whether or not a bunch of bookmakers and their clients were defrauded.

Wait are we discussing how they should be punished (length of bans) or which one is 'worse'?

 

[G.I.Joe]

I dunno. I'm just trying to look busy at work.