World Cricket Opinion

The Pakistan Match Fixing Scandal: Why We Need to Understand the Wider Problem

No Comments 31 August 2010

The current match-fixing crisis facing cricket is being reported as a stunning new development in the game. However, as any astute follower of the game will know, this situation is nothing but the logical next step for a sport that has for some time been spiralling out of control. As such, it is worthwhile looking to the past to inform the present, and thus find someway of understanding how cricket can move forward into the future.

As with most issues that face cricket, the current issue has many different aspects and contributing factors. The scandal itself is developing incredibly quickly. The latest news reports suggest that the alleged match-fixer Mazhar Majeed acts as a manager of many of the Pakistan squad, including former captains Mohammed Yousuf, Younus Khan and Shahid Afridi. In an interview with the BBC’s Jonathan Agnew, Pakistan cricket manager Yawar Saeed has stated that he has seen Majeed ‘hanging around’ the team over the last few years. Up to this point Saeed and current coach Waqar Younis have not been implicated, however it is difficult to believe that the brevity of this situation does not reach any higher than captain Salman Butt, who is one of those allegedly involved.

The other two main figures involved in this scandal are Mohammed Asif and Mohammed Amir, who are the bowlers who ‘performed’ the no-ball’s at previously agreed upon times within the match. Much of the sense of surprise regarding the scandal has been centred on the question of why these young and promising bowlers would be involved in match fixing. The answer can at least partly be found with a look at a game that is increasingly without clear leadership and control.

Mohammed Asif’s journey to this situation is certainly the more colourful one. Asif was banned from the Pakistani squad in late 2006 after failing a test for the performance-enhancing drug Nandrolone. Further to this, Asif was also detained in Dubai in 2008 on suspicion of having illegal drugs in his possession. What is most revealing about Asif’s situation is the way in which he has been handled not only by the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), but also by the International Cricket Council (ICC). The PCB is an inherently political organisation. Former Pakistan cricket coach Geoff Lawson today described its leader Ijaz Butt as incapable. The board’s history with dealing with similar problems, such as the Salim Malik match-fixing scandal, and indeed the continually scandalous Shoaib Akhtar, is less than impressive. Even the response to the recent tour of Australia was questionable. Younus Khan was sacked prior to the tour after a player revolt, and the new captain Mohammed Yousuf was banned from the game, and later re-installed as a player, after what might well have been a betting inspired loss to Australia in Sydney.

Mohammed Amir’s tale, whilst being less sensational, is perhaps more revealing about the problems facing world cricket.  Amir is cricket’s newest hot property. At 18 and with searing pace and fire in his eyes, he has captivated fans around the world. However, Amir comes from a country and from within a cricketing system, which Peter Roebuck has described as riddled with corruption. For too long the ICC has let cricket be a political toy that is fought over by various fiefdom’s around the cricketing world. Cricket’s governing body has also continually bent over to accommodate figures such as disgraced businessman Allan Stanford with his millions for West Indian cricket, and Lalit Modhi with his IPL, which appears to be corrupt to its core. Unfortunately, the way in which international cricket is managed has not helped this situation, and the true consequences of this are currently being played out. This is not to excuse Amir’s actions, but they must be understood in relation to his very poor upbringing, and a system that does very little other than allow corrupt practices to take place.

What must be understood is that this current scandal lies within a wider context of mismanagement and corruption at the highest levels. To simply cast out a few Pakistani players as scapegoats would be to simply do what cricket has done for too long. For cricket to emerge from this as a viable future sporting code it must address the core problems that have led to the current situation. If it does not, it risks being passed off as nothing more than a plaything of betting agents such as Mazhar Majeed.

World Cricket Opinion

Why Would Mohammad Amir Be Involved in Match Fixing?

2 Comments 29 August 2010

This cricket writer is still in a state of shock after the game was rocked by yet another Pakistani match-fixing scandal. If you’re yet to see the England vs Pakistan Match Fixing Scandal video footage then I suggest you give it a watch to explore the evidence for yourself. I’m sure you can jump to your own conclusions but I for one am convinced that the evidence for foul play speaks for itself.

As a cricket fan, the fact that this kind of stuff can take place at all is beyond troubling. I fail to see why a professional cricketer has to stoop to these levels to make a quick buck. Money and greed make grown men do very bizarre things in particular, but what other motivation could there be for such an act? In fact the man at the centre of the News of the World revelations – Mazhar Majeed – is caught on camera saying that the reason the players do it is because they “get paid peanuts”. Whilst this may appear to be the only plausible explanation in some of the players implicated, such as Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Kamran Akmal; in the case of Mohammad Amir it just makes no sense whatsoever.

Why Would Mohammad Amir Be Involved in Match-Fixing?

This question truly perplexes me. It’s a riddle I just don’t want to solve. Mohammad Amir has been the brightest spark of the entire summer of cricket. At only 18 years of age he stands with the world at his feet, in awe of his mesmerizing mix of left arm swing bowling. He looks a more complete bowler than Wasim Akram – incidentally his idol – was at the age of 18. It’s no understatement to consider Amir the most exciting young cricketer of his generation in world cricket at present. He’d get into a current world XI on merit with Dale Steyn arguably his only superior in the bowling outfit.

Considering the calibre of Amir and the highest regard this writer holds him, the question of why he’d be involved in such an accident just gets even more perplexing. We live in an age of cricket where a player of Amir’s immense talent is likely to get the pay check to match. What kind of sums are we talking? In 2009 Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen each fetched a staggering $1.55m in the IPL auction. That represents a phenomenal pay day.

Whilst Pakistani players were snubbed in the latest edition of the IPL, it would appear impossible to ignore the talent of this bowling sensation the next time around. A big pay day is surely just around the corner. And at 18, Mohammad Amir is likely to have at least 10 years of IPL action.  If you were to average out his pay at a conservative $200,000 per edition that would work out to be a small fortune, far from peanuts!

This cricketer writer does not have the answers but hopefully somebody out there does. Why Would Mohammad Amir Be Involved in Match Fixing? Tell us in the Comments…

Where Next? Choose from the latest cricket stories…

World Cricket Opinion

The Legacy of Muttiah Muralitharan and his Arm

No Comments 13 August 2010

A proud Sri Lankan, Dr Muralidaran Ramesh Somasunderam, investigates the legacy of Muttiah Muralitharan as both a Test Match and One Day Bowler…

I believe the retirement of Muralitharan brings to an end a career of a cricketer whom many will enjoy discussing and debating about at offices, dinners, parties, hotels, restaurants, pubs, and at homes for a very long time. Some will view and evaluate him as a genius, and others will analyse and interpret him as a bowler who did not keep within the legal requirements of the game, due to his suspect and unusual bowling action, even though he was cleared three times by tests conducted in the Department of Human Movement at The University of Western Australia. The footage and images of his bowling action indicates that Muralithran falls within the requirements of legitimacy.

Muralithran did develop the googly for a finger spinner, more specifically for a right arm off spinner, where the delivery goes the other way – he extended his arm beyond the allocated limit of 5 degrees for spin bowlers, with the limit being 10 degrees for fast bowlers.  The International Cricket Council decided to bring the 15 degree limit of an arm being bent by a bowler, pace or spin, prior to its release, because bowlers even with model actions, such as Dennis Lillee, and Michael Holding did bend their arm a fair or significant amount based on footage, and images taken of their bowling actions.  To the naked eye, the bowling actions of these two great fast bowlers were dead striaght.

Lillee had the pinnacle of the perfect orthodox pace bowler’s action, along with bowlers of the calibre  Sir Richard Hadlee, the late Sir Harold Larwood, and the late Sir Alec Bedser.

But, the point to remember in this instance or circumstance is the deformity associated with Muralithran arm – from that position to the point of release is the vital evidence in my view in relation to evaluating the legitimacy of  Muralithran as an off spin bowler in both Test Match cricket, and in One Day Internationals. This is crucial in evaluating, and analysing the legal or illegality factor in regard to Muralithran’s bowling action, therefore his style, and the execution.

I accept that one cannot coach or teach a young finger spin bowler to bowl in the manner, style, and execution of Muralithran especially as he  cannot not straighten the arm, due his disability of having polio in his right arm, which he was born with at birth. Therefore this factor must be understood based on objectivity, when Muralithran is evaluated, reviewed, and analysed, because this is what created the unusualness in relation to his bowling action, and his brilliance, when the ball hit the deck or pitch, and what the ball did thereafter.

To me, this was the most fascinating aspect, about Muralithran as a cricketer, as no bowler in the history of game did the aspects Muralithran did with a cricket ball in terms of wizardry, uniqueness, and unpredictability, as a finger spinner. I wish to place on record I genuinely believe that there will be no more right arm off bowler or a finger spinner such as Muralithran, because primarily the bowler has to have a disability, as is the case with Muralitheran’s right arm, and if one tries to bowl in the manner and style Muralithran did, the possibility of keeping within the legal and therefore the technical requirements could and will become a significant issue of contention and therefore the aspect or issue of bona fide.

Either way, the dialogue or discussion of his legitimacy or otherwise is what makes Muralithran the most interesting and thereby, the most fascinating player to play the game of cricket in regard to its history.

I believe the unconventional action of Muralithran, in particular his point of release of the ball is his greatest asset, as it came out of his hand at an unusual and extremely wired angle. This makes its trajectory in terms of the release of the ball totally different to any off spin bowler who has played the game of cricket to date, and therefore when the ball hit the pitch or deck, it came out as a scrambled seam, rather than the seam being straight or upright. This made it very difficult for a batsman to read Muralithran off the pitch or deck from his hand, because a batman did not know what way the ball will turn, and even if they read or picked the delivery correctly from his hand or off the pitch, most batsmen were not in a position to keep him at bay successfully, or score runs quickly against him, which spoke volumes for Muralithran’s ability, uniqueness, and unusualness as a great right arm off spin bowler of class, quality, versatility and variety.

In my view Muralitheran’s inclusion of a googly in his armoury made things much tougher, and therefore much more difficult for batsmen, as it gave him another dimension in regard to his bowling ammunition or repetiteur, including his demeanour and presence as a cricketer, especially right arm off spin bowling. It was logical for batsmen to try and use their feet against him, but this was much easier said than done in reality, because as many great off spin bowlers before him, he did defeat most batsmen in flight, and through deception of pace which was Muralidaran’s great asset.

As well as spinning the ball a great deal, which is  extremely rare, especially for a finger spinner, he had so many weapons that should be in every spinner’s armoury – subtle variations of pace, usage of the of the crease in terms of angles, deception of flight and guile, and immaculate line and length.  This is different to a significant degree in regard to a right arm wrist spinner, whose stock delivery is a wicket taking delivery, as the ball tuns away from right handed batsmen towards the slips, who historically have, and continue to dominate the game of cricket in regard to amount or numbers produced, such as baseball with batters.

This is why persons who compare Muralithran with Warne do not understand the game, as one is a right arm off spinner and the other is a right arm wrist spinner, even though wrist spin is a much more difficulty art to master than finger spin. In this regard, I do believe Warne highlighted and showed that he mastered his art of bowling, which was right arm wrist spin bowling and Muralithran did revolutionise the art of finger spin bowling, specifaclly right arm off spin bowling, with his uniqueness, unorthodoxy and unusualness.

In relation to Muralithran, he also turned the ball prodigiously, which was totally different, with his enormous variations, which he possessed, including the googly. This made him a different proposition altogether for a batsman, especially in Test Match cricket, where there is no curtailment of overs in regard to a bowler, and field setting to negate the flow of runs, rather than focussing on taking wickets, based on aggressive, positive and imaginative filed settings. But even in One Day cricket, Muralithran holds the record for the highest number of wickets taken by a bowler, which makes him extremely special in terms of his quality, prowess, ability, and class as a finger spin bowler, especially a right arm off spin bowler.

I believe Muralithran was a ‘thinking man’s cricketer’, who understood the strengths and weaknesses of most batsman he played against. He was also persistent, consistent, and relentless in regard in his pursuits of achieving results personally, and as a contributor to a team sport, such as cricket, and he evaluated the conditions and the requirement from his perspective very quickly in important and vital games of cricket, may it be Test Match cricket or One Day Internationals. Therefore he was not just a talented individual, but he brought other facets to the game, especially to a team, such as team spirit and unselfishness, which were invaluable and very much required, and they were greatly appreciated by both team members, cricket officials, and the general public, who were interested in the game, its direction, contribution, and its history.

In my view because Muralithran did bowl with an open chested bowling action rather than a side- on bowling action, he did not gain the late drift and curve, which is an essential requirement on harder wickets, such as in Australia and in South Africa to succeed as an off spin bowler at the highest level, which is Test Match cricket. This is why Muralithran’s track record in Australia is poor. Also he preferred to bowl over the wicket to left handers, rather than round the wicket. For this reason Muralithran was not as potent to left handed batsmen as he could have win. In some ways it nullified his stock delivery as an off spin bowler is a wicket taking delivery against a left handed batsman, as the delivery does go away from a left handed batsman towards the slips.

He therefore did not use this weapon to great effect, as he should or could, and this is why a left handed batsman of class, brilliance, and ability of Brian Lara was able to play him with confidence, comfort, and ease in Sri Lanka, where the wickets are supposed to be more conducive to spin bowling, than pace bowling, during the home Test Match Series against the West Indian cricket team.

I also think Muralithran’s mental strength, the way, the manner, and the approach he played the game of cricket in regard to its correct spirit, principle, values, and virtues made Muralithran a player everyone should admire and emulate, as a fine role model in regard to cricket, and sport in general.

Muralithran is not only a great son to all Sri Lankans who love and cherish the game of cricket, but a great son to all South Asians who admire the great game of cricket, and to all nations who cherish, value, and play the game of cricket in its correct and indeed sprit, values, and principles.

Muralithran will be missed, but his legacy and contribution to the game of cricket, especially to finger spin bowling will be remembered for him revolutionising this art of spin bowling, as he bowled off spin, as a wrist spinner, not as a finger spinner.”

This I believe is a very interesting and significant factor to understand and analyse in regard to Muralithran. Therefore, he will be remembered for his uniqueness, and unorthodoxy, and in the process changing the discourse, culture, and the approach of finger spin bowling, especially right arm off spin bowling, even though some may question this aspect, especially the traditionalists or purists of the game, who played cricket strictly based on the text book in regard to its technique, its orthodoxy, its Victorian etiquette, and its tradition.

This is why some traditionalists and purists may view the late James Laker, who played for Surrey and for England as a bowler who met these requirements, culture, and etiquette, as an authentic off spin bowler of class, quality, and purpose.  Nevertheless, I will wish to place on record that all great and original contributors in all sport who were great in their given area or field were mostly unique, and to a fair degree unorthodox, including controversial. Therefore in my view, Muralithran does fit into this category, and his contribution and uniqueness did question the traditionalists and the purists of cricket, that there is not a single way or approach to better an area or aspect in regard to the game, which in this case was right arm off spin bowling.

This is Muralithran’s original contribution to cricket, and he was also always willing to challenge himself as a player to better his performances individually, as mentioned and to the team from an overall perspective, as a key contributor who was both proactive and interactive in his roles and participation. Therefore he was a great contributor to the Sri Lankan cricket team, apart from his achievements and successes individually as a player.

In my view, Muralithran was a revelation, and therefore must be cherished and admired for his persistence, unorthodoxy, uniqueness, and his brilliance, and in the process to be prepared to be questioned and be queried about his legitimacy in regard to his bowling action. This is how history will interpret or evaluate him as a cricketer.
I will conclude by mentioning that Muralithran was an individual who has a great deal of honesty, principle, dignity, respect, and humbleness as a human being, including as a cricketer, and but he was an example to young men and women that one does not need to be arrogant and play ‘gamesmanship’ to succeed at the panicle of their sport, which in this case was the glorious game of cricket.

The above evaluation and analysis are my views of a gentleman who comes from the historical and beautiful city of Kandy in Sri Lanka.

Where to next? Pick from the Latest World Cricket Stories

World Cricket Opinion

Kumar Sangakkara: Best Test Batsman in the World

No Comments 12 August 2010

Dr Muralidaran Ramesh Somasunderam pays tribute to the inspirational Kumar Sangakarra who sits on the top of the ICC Test Batsman Ratings…

As a fellow Sri Lankan, it is both a privilege and an honour that Kumar Sangakkara is presently ranked the best batsman in Test Match cricket.

I believe Sangakkara has all the strokes both on the front and on the back foot, including the vertical and horizontal bat strokes. He is a player nice on the eye who embodies his inner mind, temperament, application and concentration, including determination, which are essential necessities and requirements, with quality technique, and hard work to be the best batsman, especially in Test Match cricket, which is the litmus test of the game.

Sangakkara is like great left hand batsmen before and during his time, such as Sir Garfield Sobers, Brain Lara, David Gower and Neil Harvey, possessing a positive and aggressive batting style capable of winning matches. Yet Sangakkara also has the ability and temperament to negate his aggression, and play within himself, if the team requires that, based on the circumstances and situation of a game. This I believe makes him special and a rare commodity at the pivotal position of number three, where a batsman of quality should be able to meet both aspects and requirements, depending on the circumstance and situation of a game.

In this regard, Sangakkara is different than Sir Garfield Sobers, who was the greatest aggressive left handed batsman in world cricket, alongside Brian Lara in the modern day game. Don’t get me wrong, Sir Garfield Sobers was the greatest cricketer in the history of the game, as a genuine all-rounder of true class and repute in regard to all facets of cricket, not just batting.

The best number three batsmen in world cricket based on the modern day game that could attack and defend was Dilip Vensakar of India, who had this unique ability to be aggressive and to defend when needed, depending on the circumstance and situation of a game. He also was elegant and a stylish right handed batsman, which was pleasing and enjoyable to the eye.

In my view, Sangakkara is a great player, especially in regard to the square / cover drive, and his nature to dominate a bowling attack from start to finish,  which is an asset to any team whom he plays for or represents. The late Sir Everton Weeks and Ritchie Richardson were also great exponents of the square / cover drive, including the late Sir Frank Worrall of the West Indies, who sat on one knee, and produced a picture perfect square / cover drive against Alan Davidson in the 1960 – 1961 Test Match series against the Australians at the Sydney Cricket Ground, which was an absolutely perfect stoke technically speaking.

Sangakkara is the best Test Match batsman in the world at the moment, because no bowler in world cricket can curtail him, especially in regard to his stroke play all-around the wicket. But to me, his square of the wicket play between cover point and extra cover is the best I have seen from a left hander in modern day cricket, because he waits for the ball to come to him, and his timing and placement are a feature, especially at the point of contact, with the square drive, where  a batsman has to open the face of the bat at the point of contact, and control the stroke by keeping the ball down, even though a player of the calibre such as Sanath Jayasuriya opened the face of the bat and lofted the ball, and on many occasions for six runs, which is extremely rare indeed.

This not only highlighted his uniqueness, but his class as a batsman of quality, who was a genuine match winner on his day in both Test Match cricket and One Day cricket.

I was brought up in the generation where I admired players such as Sidath Wettimuny, Ranjan Madugalle, and Roy Dias and Aravinda d Silva.

The greatest innings in terms of technical perfection was the 190 odd runs Sidath Wettimuny scored in the 1984 Test Match at Lords, when he played every stoke for its exact requirement, technically correctly, and he also built his innings based on total concentration, dedication, and application, but like Sangakkara, the square of the wicket stokes were a feature during his innings, with his driving and square cutting being exemplary.

Nevertheless to me the player who showed that as a Sri Lankan he had ability to be a true match winner on his day, and in the process to be prepared to attack a bowler from start to finish was Aravinda de Silva, who was a delight to watch, as he did not curtail himself, but was a champion, who dominated bowlers in both Test Match, and One Day cricket.

A precursor to the likes of Sangakkara and Jayawardene

Aravinda also played the vertical and horizontal bat strokes regularly with great success, especially the pull stroke in front of square, and was a strong driver of the ball down the ground, including the drive and cut stroke. Therefore he was a complete player, with fine onside flicks off his toes and glances, and this made it very difficult to curtail him from scoring runs quickly in a dominate manner and fashion.

He also charged at fast bowlers, and the lofted drive, which he played against Craig McDermott at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in the One Day International in 1984, is a very good example of this rare class and ability. This was an extraordinary stroke by a very special player indeed. To me, he was the advocate for players of the calibre, such as Kumar Sangakkara, and Mahela Jayawardene who do not allow opposition bowlers to curtail them or dictate terms to them, when they are at the crease batting. But, they set the pattern of play in terms of the pace, and momentum, which is great for the game and to visually watch for spectators at the ground, and for television audiences, who get full entertainment and enjoyment, which is what the game of cricket is about, like any sport, at the end of the day.

Kumar Sangakkara is also very eloquent in the English when he gives press conferences, and interviews, and is a fine captain, who will get better both tactically, and astutely, with more experience and exposure, by captaining the Sri Lankan national cricket team in both Test Match and One Day cricket.

I wish to conclude by mentioning that Sangakkara is a source of inspiration to many young batsmen in world cricket, especially up and coming batsmen in Sri Lanka in first class cricket, and in international cricket, and to young players to have a positive mindset, based on purpose, drive, dedication, application and determination.

I wish Sangakkara personally and the Sri Lankan team the very best in their future endeavours, especially in Test Match cricket, which is the pinnacle of the game, and congratulate his magnificent effort of becoming the number one batsman in Test Match cricket at present.

In my view, you are a true source of inspiration to the nation, and a genuine champion whom I hope, and wish, will continue to bring joy to many cricket enthusiasts around the world, including all Sri Lankans in years to come.

Where to next? Pick from the Latest World Cricket Stories


Newsletter

Feast on 5 Juicy Cricket Stories Each Week

Podcast

Listen to the Latest Episode - a special on the Pakistan Spot-Fixing Scandal:

One Hand One Bounce

Commentary

Betting

World Cricket Bet is the home of online cricket betting tips. Before you place your latest cricket bet, you might want to see what our betting experts think.

© 2010 World Cricket Watch. Powered by .

by