The Aamer Situation

[Uppercut]

Uppercut FTW.

In what organisation can you deliberately under-perform and ever expect to keep your job?

Exactly. He's not being banned, that sounds like he's being denied some kind of right. He's being fired in the best interests of his employers.

 

[Top_Cat]

Hypothetically, in the situation they are in (before being caught), what are Asif, or Aamer, going to say when they get asked to match-fix? "Oh sorry, that's too far, can't do that guys"?

Likely story. They're in way too deep, simple.

An experienced person would have seen that coming and perhaps not gotten involved in the first place?

 

[GotSpin]

Spot fixing via a no ball costs your team a run and has an absolutely miniscule chance of altering the outcome of a match

If the kid was into match fixing, he's doing a pretty horrible job at it when you consider that he's the youngest ever to 50 test wickets and is about the only Pakistani to try his guts out in each and every match I've seen him play

And your right when you say that cheating is different to being paid to bowl one or two no -balls - the former is much worse

I see spot fixing as match fixing. They still constitute the same act and lead down the same path. Who cares if he's been 'trying his guts' out, he's also clearly willing to detract from his performance for money.

 

[GotSpin]

I do think it is the best for Cricket, if spot-fixers get life bans. However, I don't think giving an 18 year old spot-fixer a life ban is apropriate.

In regular criminal law, judges also try to find a balance between the interest of society and a properly fitting punishment.



I totally disagree and I find that this even makes the difference. Match fixers should be banned for life imo. But spot fixing has a very minimal influence on test results. Neither the audience, nor cricket, nor teammates, nor us posters are victims. The betters and bookies are. Therefor, this whole thing should be in a civil and/or criminal court in the first place.

A 2 year ban would do for Amir!

Feel free to disagree, but where do you draw the line between spot fixing and match fixing. IMO, there's an extremely blurred line between the two and can one define where spot fixing start and matching fixing begin? The best course of option for the health of cricket is to class the two as the same and punish accordingly, which should be a life ban.

I'm still struggling to understand why an 18yr old cannot be life banned. He's already shown that he's willing to forgo the integrity of the game for a few dollars. He's claimed innocence, hasn't talked yet, and should never play again. A two year ban is nothing. A slap on the wrist for something that is destroying the health of the game so drastically

 

[four_or_six]

What if Amir had got Trott out on that no-ball? Is it match-fixing then? I think it's very difficult to draw the line. Plus he didn't take any more wickets after that no-ball to Trott. Who knows if it affected his performance.

 

[vic_orthdox]

An experienced person would have seen that coming and perhaps not gotten involved in the first place?

At U/19 level, the ICC sat down every team and had an anti-corruption talk with each of them, expressing pretty much everything that has come to light.

That they'll target young players. That they won't focus on fixing matches, but on "spot-fixing", which wasn't the term that they used but they described exactly the same acts. Bowling wides in certain overs, bowling two no-balls over an innings, things like that.

 

[Stapel]

Feel free to disagree, but where do you draw the line between spot fixing and match fixing. IMO, there's an extremely blurred line between the two and can one define where spot fixing start and matching fixing begin? The best course of option for the health of cricket is to class the two as the same and punish accordingly, which should be a life ban.

I agree the line between the two is blurry. But that is no reason to simply treat them the same! Just like society doesn't send the same sentences to theives of 10 euros and thieves of 1.000.000 euros. Where to draw the line there? It's always arbitrary!

Yet, there is a clear difference between bowling a couple of deliberate no-balls and match fixing!

I'm still struggling to understand why an 18yr old cannot be life banned. He's already shown that he's willing to forgo the integrity of the game for a few dollars. He's claimed innocence, hasn't talked yet, and should never play again. A two year ban is nothing. A slap on the wrist for something that is destroying the health of the game so drastically

I strongly think maturity is still rapidly rising in one's early twenties!


Another note:
The ICC, imho, strongly needs either clear jurisprudence or strong guidance. A simple ICC law that says:

• Spot-fixing means a 5-year ban

• Match fixing means a life ban

• Under twenties get some ease

We could argue for years about the exact rules, but that's not the point. Punishments should be clear up front!

 

[Uppercut]

I don't think there should be a distinction drawn, personally. A solitary no-ball discovered by a somewhat unlikely journalistic coup could quite possibly be the tip of the iceberg, particularly given that the entire purpose of having the no-ball bowled was to prove that the fixer had the power to affect events on an international cricket field.

 

[G.I.Joe]

People need to remember that this isn't a simple case of a few players taking money for bowling a no ball at a pre arranged point. Majeed had made it clear this was just a teaser to prove the control he had over the players on his roster. It's obvious the implicated players were willing to do much more than just bowl no balls.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Ah, screw you, Upper****!

 

[Xuhaib]

People need to remember that this isn't a simple case of a few players taking money for bowling a no ball at a pre arranged point. Majeed had made it clear this was just a teaser to prove the control he had over the players on his roster. It's obvious the implicated players were willing to do much more than just bowl no balls.

yes but there is no way players can be implicated on this as apart from Majeed's statement there is no other proof (atleast from what that has been revealed) to show that players were no just merely spot fixing but were showing their loyalty to Majeed for any future endeavors.

A lot of Majeed's statements should be treated with a pinch of salt because in between all the good stuff he has also given some absurd statements which shows there are inconsistencies and loopholes in this case.

 

[Hurricane]

I don't think there should be a distinction drawn, personally. A solitary no-ball discovered by a somewhat unlikely journalistic coup could quite possibly be the tip of the iceberg, particularly given that the entire purpose of having the no-ball bowled was to prove that the fixer had the power to affect events on an international cricket field.

This is the point I have been making. Like I said I voted for 5 years but the major argument I respect for a life ban is the point you have made. There is no doubt that other shananigans have taken place...

 

[Hurricane]

yes but there is no way players can be implicated on this as apart from Majeed's statement there is no other proof (atleast from what that has been revealed) to show that players were no just merely spot fixing but were showing their loyalty to Majeed for any future endeavors.

Just like every one is certain that when the second plane flew into the building that it was terrorism. Every one can be certain that the players would do other tasks that Majeed asked if they did those no balls. And we can be certain that they had been doing other things prior to the no balls. You know that those no balls weren't their first act,

 

[Xuhaib]

Just like every one is certain that when the second plane flew into the building that it was terrorism. Every one can be certain that the players would do other tasks that Majeed asked if they did those no balls. And we can be certain that they had been doing other things prior to the no balls. You know that those no balls weren't their first act,

yes knowing about it is one thing but getting proof for them is completely different and ICC can't punish the player unless they have proof of it.The players can be punished for no balls since there is enough proof against them but punishing them for any other offence is not possible with currently revealed evidence.Using just Majeed's statements to punish the players for an offence is not possible at this stage since a lot of his statements can be shown as contradictory and flat out wrong.

 

[vic_orthdox]

They can only be punished for what they've been caught for.

But it highlights the ridiculousness of saying, "Oh it's only a couple of no-balls", "It's just spot fixing", etc.

 

[bagapath]

yes knowing about it is one thing but getting proof for them is completely different and ICC can't punish the player unless they have proof of it.

okay, then. if there is proof.... if the no balls were proved beyond doubt to be just the tip of the ice berg, of more spot fixing and possible match fixing acts to happen in future, then would you recommend a life ban or not?

 

[Xuhaib]

okay, then. if there is proof.... if the no balls were proved beyond doubt to be just the tip of the ice berg, of more spot fixing and possible match fixing acts to happen in future, then would you recommend a life ban or not?

absolutely infact I believe there should be a life ban for Asif and Butt even on current evidence.

 

[GotSpin]

@ Stapel - quote thing stuffed up


But this isn't a clear cut case of a certain number stolen. there is no clear distinction between the two at all, they have the same effect and deserve the same punishment.

I still fail to understand reasons why a life time ban for spot fixing is bad. What negative consequences can outweigh the positive

 

[Stapel]

@ Stapel - quote thing stuffed up


But this isn't a clear cut case of a certain number stolen. there is no clear distinction between the two at all, they have the same effect and deserve the same punishment.

Well, match fixing has a bigger effect than spot fixing! You disagree with that?

I still fail to understand reasons why a life time ban for spot fixing is bad. What negative consequences can outweigh the positive

Well, I do agree a life ban would be best for cricket!
But I don't think a life ban is a proper punishment for Amir.

 

[GotSpin]

Well, match fixing has a bigger effect than spot fixing! You disagree with that?




Well, I do agree a life ban would be best for cricket!
But I don't think a life ban is a proper punishment for Amir.

Yeah I do because I classify them as the same, with both having an equally bad effect on the health of cricket.