Salim Malik to appeal life ban

[luckyeddie]

I thought that this thread would eventually get interesting.
We have had any number of similar conversations over the last few days/weeks, and every now and again the word 'conspiracy' keeps creeping back in from certain sources. I think that the ICC would just like the whole thing to go away, but it's not of their making - they just have to deal with all the rubbish that's left behind afterwards.
Who paid the ultimate cricketing price over (alleged) ball-tampering? Not the cheating bowlers and captains (no names, but we all have our own favourites) but a flipping umpire (David Constant) who was accused from certain quarters of being biased or racist or a cheat or a liar or blind or etc etc.
Then there's suspect bowling actions, match fixing, betting scandals, bribes, the list is endless. I think that we all 'know' there's more to some of these issues than meet the eye, and that (certainly in the past) they were possibly commonplace?

All that can be done by the authorities is to jump very hard on those cases which are proved, and to turn a blind eye to those which cannot be. However, the penalties for being caught red-handed should be sufficiently strict to 'encourage' players not to be naughty boys again.

Regarding High Court action, well, they might well 'exonerate' someone on appeal, but does that mean that anyone will ever forced to select the player in question again? I think not.

 

[Andre]

He's a filthy cheat. The rat that spread the plauge in Cricket. I for one will be jumping up and down if he gets off.

 

[Neil Pickup]

By all means continue the discussion but watch the abuse, which is getting towards nationalistic and disregarding all evidence...

So, back to the topic. Does any actually believe that Malik wasn't a match fixer? He's as guilty as Cronje was, and should never play again.

[Edited on 7/23/02 by Neil Pickup]

 

[Top_Cat]

Back to what I was discussing earlier, whilst most Aussies will defend the two idiots until proof is shown that match fixing was Warne and Waugh's intention, if such evidence is shown, the Aussie public opinion will turn on them with a wrath you wouldn't believe.

That I think is the principle difference between South Africa's Hansie experience and ours. It's sort of the price you pay for lying. The support when there's no proof is so great, that a betrayal of that support by lying or cheating is also great.

Regarding High Court action, well, they might well 'exonerate' someone on appeal, but does that mean that anyone will ever forced to select the player in question again? I think not.

Well, at least until the first banned then exonerated player sues for lost earnings, anyway.

So, back to the topic. Does any actually believe that Malik wasn't a match fixer? He's as guilty as Cronje was, and should never play again.

Ah, he's too old to play anyway. Banning him from any level of cricket which is worth any money should be enough. If some grade team wants to recruit him, that should be their perogative. He cheated and lied to the game which made his living. He didn't kill anyone.

 

[aussie_beater]

Facts :

1) Waugh and Warne took money.
2) Cronje took money.
3) Malik took money.
4) Azhar and Jedeja also did.

The match fixing part is not conclusively proved in any of the cases.In Malik's and Cronje's case there is more evidence to suggest match fixing was done by them, compared to the other cases.

Now what has happened to all these players.Four of them are banned for life and sadly one is dead as well, but two of them(Waugh and Warne) are running around scot-free.Why is that ? Why weren't they put into a cheating trial by proper courts of law instead of some under-the-table work by the Aussie board ? What are the credentials of the Aussie board to have done an investigation which is supposed to be done by legal authorities and none else ? Why were they atleast not suspended till exonerated ?

There are too many questions left to be answered by the Aussies for their handling of this case that the cricket world would like to know.

 

[Top_Cat]

D00d, what's the common thread amongst all of those? Malik was tried and found guilty in his own country. Ditto for Conje, Jadeja and Azhar.

The Mark Waugh and Shane Warne affair didn't end at the ACB punishments in 1995. I think that's the fundamental mistake you're making because you sure bring it up a lot. Once it was revealed to the public, BOTH Waugh and Warne WERE summoned to Australian courts to answer for their crimes and by the same process which found the others guilty of match-fixing (i.e. the respective country's individual criminal courts), were found guilty of taking money but not for under-performing to fix a match.

UNLIKE the others, the Aussie courts even allowed Pakistani investigators AND an ICC delegation to question the two about their involvement. Other than the money-taking (which they should have been suspended for AT THE TIME, I agree), it was found they had no case to answer. Waugh and Warne willingly subjected themselves to being questioned abut the same issues time and again by different parties and they were STILL found to have not played a part in match-fixing.

What more do you want? A lynching?

As I said, these guys have been investigated more than once by different parties using different evidence, different tactics etc., yet the same conclusion was reached. Does this possibly mean that there is NO evidence of further wrong-doing? Of course.

As I said, if there is any evidence of a cover-up, well Aussies love a conspiracy theory and would also turn on these guys SO damn quick. There is little to be gained from lying because, as the incident itself proves, it gets found out in the end because someone always talks. And believe me, if these guys WERE guilty, I'd happily eat my words and join you in condemning them. Hold me to it. I DARE ya.

 

[aussie_beater]

....Other than the money-taking (which they should have been suspended for AT THE TIME, I agree)....

As I said, that in none of the cases it could be proved conclusively through evidence that the players involved had under-performed in a match in order to fix the results. But that they had taken money from the bookies was beyond doubt.

You say that Warne and Waugh should have been suspended "at the time", whatever that means.But for how long and till what ? If you answer that you'll find that the punishments for this particular case have been far less severe then the other ones for crimes which are quite the same.


[Edited on 7/23/02 by aussie_beater]

 

[Top_Cat]

You say that Warne and Waugh should have been suspended "at the time", whatever that means.

Just that the issue should have been dealt with at the time by the ICC. There's no sense in punishing the players now. Because the ACB prevented the ICC from dealing with it at the time by blocking things, THEY should have been punished at the time their indescretion was discovered.

 

[aussie_beater]

THEY should have been punished at the time their indescretion was discovered.

And punished with life bans, would you say ?

 

[Top_Cat]

And punished with life bans, would you say ?

If there was proof that they fixed or attempted to fix matches then sure. Salim Malik and Cronje paid players to under-perform, abusing their positions of power that being a captain entails. The fact that Herchelle and the other guy didn't actually follow through with their part of the bargain is irrelevant (and Herchelle Gibb's 'punishment' was farcical, almost as much as Waugh's and Warne's). The facts remain that those two paid others to underperform whilst in a position of power. Therefore they were part of the perpetuation of this problem.

Waugh and Warne were guys who got paid for providing information which could affect betting on the match and stupidly took money from these guys. There's no evidence to suggest that they deliberately underperformed, encouraged others or paid others to underperform or even take money for providing info. This is a lesser crime to me. You may argue that your uncle says they were ready to take money for underperforming but that's irrelevant. You can only prosecute people for what they DID, not what they said they might/will do.

So in conclusion, a life-ban would have been a little harsh but a monetary fine was ridiculously lenient. A ban for two years would probably have been enough. Now, if there was evidence at the time that they HAD taken money to underperform or had offered to pay other to do the same or HAD paid others to do the same, then a life-ban would be too lenient for them in my book.

So what I'm saying is that what these two did wasn't innocent or good but compared to Malik and Conje's crimes, they were more mild.

 

[aussie_beater]

...and Herchelle Gibb's 'punishment' was farcical, almost as much as Waugh's and Warne's....

Well, that's the whole point.By not punishing these players in a more exemplary manner at the right time and feigning ignorance about it all for over four long years, the Aussie board has done more disservice to cricket then anybody else in its history.Because if it had taken proper action in 1994 maybe things wouldn't have come to such a pass later.

As the monetary transaction was conclusively proven, life ban should have been the only punishment without mercy just like what happened to everybody else.To say what they did was "stupid" and not "crooked" is the height of naivete.

 

[Top_Cat]

Well, that's the whole point.By not punishing these players in a more exemplary manner at the right time and feigning ignorance about it all for over four long years, the Aussie board has done more disservice to cricket then anybody else in its history.Because if it had taken proper action in 1994 maybe things wouldn't have come to such a pass later.

No argument there. Especially in light of their quite pro-active position on match-fixing. It just makes them look like hypocrites, which they are. It'd be the same if one of our Aussie swimmers is found to be doping, since we're so eager to condemn everyone else for it. I'm not saying don't condomn but don't claim that it simply doesn't happen in your backyard when in the case of cricket, it most patently does.

As the monetary transaction was conclusively proven, life ban should have been the only punishment without mercy just like what happened to everybody else.

Okay I'll concede that. Having met the guys on a few occasions, I guess I'm pretty biased when I say that a life-ban would be harsh. In light of the allegations and convictions, I don't think I would be complaining TOO loudly if hat were to occur.

To say what they did was "stupid" and not "crooked" is the height of naivete.

Well that their actions were. Stupid AND crooked. They weren't unaware of what they were doing and should have known better when thinking of the consequences, if indeed they even thought at all. Maybe they did think but didn't care (probably the most likely).

 

[cozmiccoyoete]

Well guys u got message from Our Aussie friends, either come up with an evidence that Waugh/Warne were involved in fixing or that evidence were burried by the ACB or just SHUT UP and accept whatever dumb story the ACB has come up with(even if it doesn't make any sense)
Bookies aren't dumb people, they don't just pay someone 2000 $ coz of weather & pitch info.Imagine an Indian bookie asking for such kind of info, everyone knew about the weather, as for pitch..LOL as if we don't know how the pitches are like over here.

The best way to exonerate them is(apart from accepting that dumb story) label them as naive and stupid.Warne and Waugh are intelligent cricketers, their claim that they weren't even aware that they were being bribed is hilarious.
Hansie always said that he did exactly what the Aussies did, problem with him was that SA board didn't protect its player like the ACB!Had he been an Aussie, i'm sure he would have got away!

 

[Kiwi]

I will be very disappointed if he gets away with this. I was a huge fan of Hansie but I think he got everything he deserved by the life ban.. This guy deserves the same.

 

[scorpio]

i see that T_C is still going on....

we both are incompetant to analyze this issue from a lawyers perspective.

Let me give u a laymans perspective.

India is comparitively a poor country. You could be called rich or atleast upper middle class if u make around $200(USD). (well atleast well off by most standards)

So basically some one paid waugh and warne 50 month salary to get what weather info!!!

does that put things into perspective abt how much money was given to them?

yeah we could go on all day that there is evidence correlating them to fixing..

But bottom line is they were just a step away from it. By accpeting money they eventually paved the way for malik to approach them later. Thts how it works.

The two cheats were tested first..found susceptible..But before goin the hansie way the aussie board stoped them

If they had not been that good in cricket obviosly they would have been banned. But auss board choose to hide it and give a insignificant ban just to make a show that it cared.

You can gloss it any way u want but they should atleast have got the punishment gibbs got....

 

[luckyeddie]

1981, Third Test, Headingley, Dennis Lillee got his bus driver to bet a tenner on for him for England to win (the odds at the time were 500-1).

What would happen nowadays if any player did the same?

 

[Top_Cat]

You can gloss it any way u want but they should atleast have got the punishment gibbs got....

And again, we agree. Since I didn't spell it out last time, here goes; w-e- a-g-r-e-e.

1981, Third Test, Headingley, Dennis Lillee got his bus driver to bet a tenner on for him for England to win (the odds at the time were 500-1).

What would happen nowadays if any player did the same?

Don't forget Rod Marsh did the same. I'd imagine that in betteing on a contest that they were involved in, they'd be pretty severly punished, like they should have been at the time, especially since Australia lost and they collected an awful lot of money.

[Edited on 7/24/02 by Top_Cat]

 

[scorpio]

finally T_C sees the light...hehe