"Australia's slow start in game one scrutinised"

[pup11]

It seems everything can be construed as match-fixing now.

"Sri Lanka vice-captain Mahela Jayawardene is considering legal action in response to commentary that implied he was guilty of match-fixing."

BBC Sport - Cricket - Cricket World Cup: Jayawardene outraged by TV remark

I guess once the genie is out of the bottle, everyone wants to get their accusations in.

I think its just lame if people start throwing in accusations without any evidence, credibility of the game and honour of an individual(s) is at stake when something on these lines is said and it won't help the sport or the players if every event is looked upon with suspicion.

 

[Blaze 18]

ICC has lost it.

 

[Maximus0723]

ICC trying hardest to not let Aussies win again.

They have my support

 

[Blaze 18]

Haha, this is only going to make them play better. Great teams (and great players) generally play better when they are pissed off. Expect Shane Watson and Brad Haddin to score fifty in the first five overs, in the next match.

 

[Burgey]

I think its just lame if people start throwing in accusations without any evidence, credibility of the game and honour of an individual(s) is at stake when something on these lines is said and it won't help the sport or the players if every event is looked upon with suspicion.

You were in the Steve Davies thread yesterday saying he was left out because he was gay.

Now that's unfounded... This post of yours has no small measure of irony to it mate..

 

[Top_Cat]

"The slow rate of scoring in the first two overs was scrutinised by the ICC anti-corruption and security unit," Indianexpress.com website said in a report from the national wire service, Press Trust of India.

"Sources aware of developments said the ICC ACSU (Anti-Corruption Security Unit) had carried out a quiet review of the match after questions were raised over the slow start taken by Watson and Haddin.

"With the spectre of spot-fixing now looming over international cricket following the bans on three Pakistani players for spot-fixing last year on the England tour, sources said the ICC ASCU was keeping a vigilant eye on all matches in the World Cup and the slow start by the Australian openers caught their attention."

That could mean anything. Could mean a 5 second phone check along the lines of "Were there any unusually large bets and wins for the first two overs on Haddin and/or Watson? No? Okay, thanks." Or it could have meant they're scrutinising every instance of 'unusual' play in games.

See the problem is that articles like this from the Indian Express sort of infer there were reasons other than the slow start which prompted the investigations because, well, you'd hope there were.

A few possibilities;

- the ICC unit are very under-worked and are looking to justify their existence ("We HAVE to look at every over, give us more money/people!") and/or;
- they're trying to conduct investigations at a distance from the locals
- they don't have a good enough relationship with the local gambling industry to pick up on unusual stuff/only act on info which actually has something to it or;
- they do but don't trust the sources.

Reckon it'll play out like this; for the investigators, it will become very old very quickly as just about every lead goes nowhere but at least they'll have statistics by the end of the tournament showing how many hundreds of Possibly Real Instances of Corruption (PRIC's) they looked into and found nothing. So, under their watch, no corruption of any sort occurred in the tournament thus completely ignoring the lessons agencies such as the CIA have learnt over several decades about how useless collecting info at a distance is (unilateral inquiries are not a very intelligent way of going about investigations).

 

[Cruxdude]

Meh, most probably the newspaper is twisting words for its own gains. Cannot react more than that for a baseless allegation.

As Top_Cat has said I think the investigators would be looking at every game and any suspicious pattern in the game and trying to see if any spike in betting happens.

 

[Burgey]

Meh, most probably the newspaper is twisting words for its own gains. Cannot react more than that for a baseless allegation.

As Top_Cat has said I think the investigators would be looking at every game and any suspicious pattern in the game and trying to see if any spike in betting happens.

I think that's most likely right.

Still though, if something even looks remotely suspect, I'd rather they err on the side of looking at it. If they have looked at this, the real shame is that it leaked out. Better that they would have looked at it then dismissed it quietly, unless they found something of course.

 

[Jono]

Couple of callers on SEN today fuming at this, and along with the Ponting incident, unhappy with the treatment of the Australian cricket team by India.

Fair enough with the Ponting incident as the Indian media acted in their usual dickhead manner, but this is entirely the ICC isn't it? The reports haven't been that sensationalist have they?

 

[Top_Cat]

Still though, if something even looks remotely suspect, I'd rather they err on the side of looking at it.

Have to say I disagree with this. While they're busy chasing their tails looking at every pissy anomaly, they might miss a big one (I assume the anti-coruption unit doesn't have limitless resources). Not to mention all the bad will and harrassment it's likely to generate, especially if they end up looking at every team/game. Not a great use of investigative resources unless they really do have a hotline to some bookies who could actually give them an idea of who's betting where and on what quickly. Info like that gets old quickly.

Get on the ground, cultivate relationships with local law enforcement/your own informants, etc. assuming they haven't already. Investigation at a distance almost never works and, if I was in the hierarchy of the ICC, I'd hope they were doing things smarter than picking up on every slightly anomalous bit of play.

 

[Burgey]

Have to say I disagree with this. While they're busy chasing their tails looking at every pissy anomaly, they might miss a big one (I assume the anti-coruption unit doesn't have limitless resources). Not to mention all the bad will and harrassment it's likely to generate, especially if they end up looking at every team/game. Not a great use of investigative resources unless they really do have a hotline to some bookies who could actually give them an idea of who's betting where and on what quickly. Info like that gets old quickly.

Get on the ground, cultivate relationships with local law enforcement/your own informants, etc. assuming they haven't already. Investigation at a distance almost never works and, if I was in the hierarchy of the ICC, I'd hope they were doing things smarter than picking up on every slightly anomalous bit of play.

Just ban India until the illegal betting is weeded out there.

Seriously, they need to look to Genesis, not Revelation. While ever players from some places are poorly paid they are vulnerable to this influence. That doesn't excuse them of course, but working with authorities at the seat of the bookmaking will deliver better long-term results, surely.

Not doing so is rather like picking up junkies for possession and letting Stringer Bell carry on. Can some of our Indian posters provide any insight as to how the fight against illegal bookmakers over there is going?

 

[pup11]

You were in the Steve Davies thread yesterday saying he was left out because he was gay.

Now that's unfounded... This post of yours has no small measure of irony to it mate..

I clearly said Davies ''could'' have been omitted from the side because he was gay and discrimination of that sort is hardly something that's unheard of.

Still I'm not running the International Cricket Council so its not as if what I say has any wider implications.

 

[Debris]

Wonder if there is more evidence that we have not heard. 2 overs is a very specific figure.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

The way i see these games against the minnows is that the only way they win is by getting the bigger nation out for around 200 and win a tight low scoring game so Australia being sensible early on and making sure they didn't lose early wickets giving them a platform for later on was a fair enough tactic in the opening game considering they had been comfortably thrashed in the two warm up games a week before.

It seems people aren't allowed to build an innings anymore.

 

[Debris]

Plus the openers had not had a good run in the warm-up games and were a bit out of form.

 

[Maximus0723]

Aussies are far less confident with spin then with pace. Especially their middle order.
Zimbabwe's strength is their spinners. Ray price is their lead bowler who complemented the attack. You don't want to lose couple of early wickets trying to slog and expose your middle order to Zimbabwe's spinners in a pressure situation.

 

[Spark]

And the top order.

Just because you're being circumspect doesn't mean you should be going at 2.5 an over. They're hardly turning it square and there was ample opportunity to manipulate the ball for singles and keep an acceptable scoring rate without much risk. That Watson and Haddin are incapable of it is of some concern.

 

[Shri]

While they're investigating slow things, they may as well look into Craigos' brain activity.

Or your ***ual activities.

 

[Burgey]

Or your ***ual activities.

Took you 24 hours to come up with that?

Son, I am disappoint.

 

[Shri]

About a second after I saw it ya old bum.