|
|
Post by PeterB on Sept 1, 2010 9:55:45 GMT -4
Gambling and match fixing have always been part of cricket. Betting on cricket matches was rampant in the 19th century, particularly at lower levels of the game, and when there was a difference in skill levels between the teams.
In 1981, in a Test Match between Australia and England, Australia was in such a commanding position that bookmakers offered 500-1 odds for an English win. A couple of the Australian players, unable to resist the odds, put 20 pounds on an English win. England then made a stunning comeback to win the match. Questions were asked, but there's little likelihood these players threw the game - it was other members of the Australian team who played poorly, who had no knowledge of the bets until after the game.
In the 1990s two national captains got caught up in betting - Hansie Cronje of South Africa and Mohammed Azharuddin of India. Both were banned for life. Captains are particular suspects for throwing matches, because they're responsible for things like deciding who bowls next and where the fielders are placed - what could be suspicious in one person's eyes could just be idiosyncratic in someone else's eyes. But bets also involved things like a batsman agreeing to get out having scored less than a certain number of runs (let yourself get bowled or run out), or for a bowler agreeing to give away more than a certain number of runs in a given number of overs (by bowling badly). The difference between a bad bowler and a bad pitcher is that while a bad pitcher can be substituted, a bad bowler can't be - a cricket team of eleven usually only has four or five specialist bowlers, and almost always they're all needed.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 1, 2010 11:35:21 GMT -4
If you fixed a cricket match, most Americans wouldn't be able to tell. We can't figure out how you win a match in the first place. The Wikipedia page on Cricket (the sport) is a good place to start. Ah, you seem to be under the mistaken assupmtion that we Americans would be interested in knowing how to play Cricket. Allow me to disillusion you.  |
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Sept 1, 2010 13:04:08 GMT -4
As I recall, Baseball Legend Pete Rose was banned, while manager of the Somewhere Somethings, for betting on baseball. My information is old, and I wasn't paying much attention at the time, but I believe consensus was that, while he couldn't have actually had much effect on the outcome of any given game, it looked bad and he hadn't ought to.
Peter, I've tried. But if Peter Wimsey can't get me to understand it, I promise you Wikipedia can't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 1, 2010 16:26:20 GMT -4
The Wikipedia page on Cricket (the sport) is a good place to start. Ah, you seem to be under the mistaken assupmtion that we Americans would be interested in knowing how to play Cricket. Allow me to disillusion you. Its a weird sport. I don't watch weird sports. Just hockey. |
|
|
|
Post by randombloke on Sept 1, 2010 17:11:52 GMT -4
Although I do know a tiny, very little bit about the rules of cricket: what perplexes me is how the actions of one or two players are supposed to "fix" the result. Last time I looked, first class / international matches had two teams of eleven players, all playing to win??? (this also applies to allegations of football match fixing....) I believe the specific match in question was not itself "fixed" as a whole, but rather that a few players were paid to make specific errors at specific times that could then be bet on (spot betting as it is known), regardless of the overall outcome. I believe it is no longer possible to place a bet on when the streaker will show up in the Ashes because that is technically not part of the match. Though it is traditional.  |
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 1, 2010 20:51:05 GMT -4
The Wikipedia page on Cricket (the sport) is a good place to start. Ah, you seem to be under the mistaken assupmtion that we Americans would be interested in knowing how to play Cricket. Allow me to disillusion you. Believe it or not, the US actually has a team and plays international matches. It is gaining in popularity too. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Sept 2, 2010 5:19:34 GMT -4
The Wikipedia page on Cricket (the sport) is a good place to start. Ah, you seem to be under the mistaken assupmtion that we Americans would be interested in knowing how to play Cricket. Allow me to disillusion you. What a pity some of "you Americans" always feel the need to point that out every time the sport gets a mention. Somehow I always manage to control the urge to point out how massively and fundamentally uninterested I am in baseball whenever that alleged sport comes up in conversation.  As a Brit, cricket (and especially test cricket) is my second favourite sport ... my favourite being (ice) hockey. Go figure! |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 2, 2010 11:12:19 GMT -4
I am just about as disinterested in baseball, but at least I understand it.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Sept 2, 2010 14:30:16 GMT -4
What a pity some of "you Americans" always feel the need to point that out every time the sport gets a mention. Somehow I always manage to control the urge to point out how massively and fundamentally uninterested I am in baseball whenever that alleged sport comes up in conversation. Whereas I generally show the dignity to avoid mentioning that I find pretty much all sports tedious, silly, and overrated. The only reason cricket ever comes in for a special mention from me is its appearance in that book. Let's also not forget that one of the sports "Americans" aren't interested in is soccer, which was huge back home. Those Americans didn't count, though. Nor is the fact that the designation "soccer mom" has a middle-American meaning. |
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Sept 2, 2010 19:03:09 GMT -4
It's not "The Government" behind it. Actually, as I think about it, that need not necessarily be the case. Not that I'm accusing the Pakistani government of collusion with bookmakers and match-fixers, but I understand there's a lot of cosy relationships - for example the head of Pakistani cricket being a relative of the Defence Minister, or some such. In an atmosphere like that, rumours can easily start. |
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 2, 2010 22:21:05 GMT -4
"The Government" isn't Pakistani
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Sept 3, 2010 2:36:02 GMT -4
On a slightly different sport. If memory serves, there were a few floodlight "failures" during football matches. And certain syndicates raked it in in the far east.
|
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Sept 3, 2010 8:50:29 GMT -4
"The Government" isn't Pakistani Oh, sorry, yes. I get you. |
|
