Butt/Amir/Asif - Spot Fixing Trial

[Cevno]

prevents a fair trail innit.

As if they didn't know.

 

[Cevno]

Not sure you've quite grasped the "devil's advocate" concept there, old son.

Firstly the gentleman in question was not definitively caught "doping", rather taking a substance sometimes used to hide evidence of the same (I'm sure we all have our own opinions, but suspicion is a very different beast than conviction in a court of law) & secondly whilst, at best, naive and morally dubious, accepting money from illegal bookmakers isn't, in itself, prima facie evidence of wrong doing.

Tbf, as to the first point the substance was banned too, so doesn't make that much of a difference.

And as for the second point, yes it is wrongdoing. It may not have been in the rules at the time, i am not sure but Marlon Samuels was banned for a year or 2 just recently for doing exactly the same, infact for just having contact with a bookie despite there being not any clear evidence of taking money unlike with Warne, May and Waugh.

Not that i agree with the comparison, but in isolation those instances were clear cases of wrongdoing too, where they got away despite recommendations of a ban from a independent commision Cricket Australia set up itself. And Tim May is the current FICA head too iirc.

 

[Cevno]

Quite simply it doesn't.

And all I'll say on this silly matter is that it'll always amaze me Warne and Waugh got paid to say stuff that would have been in the papers and on the radio. Indeed at the time Michael Slater actually had a deal with a radio station here where he pretty much said the exact same things as Warne and Waugh did. You want Tony Greig done in for doing his pitch reports?

That was the explanation given and it also included revealing details of Australia team selections. Who knows what else they were paid for too, as CA hushed up the matter at the time, instead of enquiring further.

 

[Spikey]

That was the explanation given and it also included revealing details of Australia team selections. Who knows what else they were paid for too, as CA hushed up the matter at the time, instead of enquiring further.

Yeah, in the subcontinent we're thinking of playing Warne and May. SHOCK HORROR. I hope these bookmakers have learnt their lesson and instead read cricketweb.net/forum for their 'inside' information.

 

[Furball]

As if they didn't know.

Any potential joror who had a connection to either cricket or the gambling industry wasn't allowed to serve on the jury.

And can we stop comparing this to what Warne and Waugh did?

 

[Cevno]

Yeah, in the subcontinent we're thinking of playing Warne and May. SHOCK HORROR. I hope these bookmakers have learnt their lesson and instead read cricketweb.net/forum for their 'inside' information.

Well, if your are playing Devil's advocate knowing the exact team selection details and details of conditions helps the Bookie make overall Odds better than knowing when someone would bowl a No ball, which i am not sure anyone bets on even.

Imo, it has nothing to do with this case as the rules, timing and the details are completely different, but i do not agree with brushing what they did under the carpet too, as was said by the Pakistan judicial commision and then the Independent Commision set up by CA(who recommended a ban).
As i said Marlon Samuels case is another similar example too.

Mind you i think Azhar got off lightly too despite CBI having evidence against him and Delhi Police failing to file a chargesheet due to inexplicable reasons.

 

[Furball]

Well, if your are playing Devil's advocate knowing the exact team selection details and details of conditions helps the Bookie make overall Odds better than knowing when someone would bowl a No ball, which i am not sure anyone bets on even.

Imo, it has nothing to do with this case as the rules, timing and the details are completely different, but i do not agree with brushing what they did under the carpet too, as was said by the Pakistan judicial commision and then the Independent Commision set up by CA(who recommended a ban).
As i said Marlon Samuels case is another similar example too.

Mind you i think Azhar got off lightly too despite CBI having evidence against him and Delhi Police failing to file a chargesheet due to inexplicable reasons.

It helps the bookie, but Warne and Waugh weren't undermining the sport.

 

[Cevno]

Any potential joror who had a connection to either cricket or the gambling industry wasn't allowed to serve on the jury.

Are they not allowed to use the Internet or their phones during the duration of the trial too?

And can we stop comparing this to what Warne and Waugh did?

I agree that this is a different case which doesn't have much to do with that and didn't bring that up either.

But, was just setting the facts straight in that case since it was mentioned already. Imo,and everything is pretty clear that in isolation, they clearly got away with wrongdoing very lightly. Also don't see how anyone can demand even Life bans for these 3, but at the same time defend those 3.

 

[Spikey]

Well, if your are playing Devil's advocate knowing the exact team selection details and details of conditions helps the Bookie make overall Odds better than knowing when someone would bowl a No ball, which i am not sure anyone bets on even.
.

Which they didn't because they weren't the captain etc.

Basically there's almost no comparison between Warne-Waugh and this. Actions speak louder than words as they say.......

 

[Spikey]

anyway they're back in court and Gareth Peirce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia seems to be in the Amir camp

Also, http://blog.thecricketer.com/?p=33536

 

[Cevno]

It helps the bookie, but Warne and Waugh weren't undermining the sport.

It was illegal and unethical nevertheless. And whether they were undermining the sport or not is highly debatable.
Marlon Samuels was banned for even less and the CA inquiry itself recommended a Ban when this became public in 1999.

To add to that it became clear later that they had alleged links with Pakistani/Indian bookmakers too, through Salim Malik and that they and CA had withheld disclosing the names of Pakistani Cricketers involved in match fixing and having big contacts with Bookmakers, to save themselves and hush up the matter. By the time the Pakistan Judicial commission was formed in 1999 to look into match fixing and these details were disclosed, those Pakistani players were continuing with their illegal activities for 5 years.

 

[andyc]

anyway they're back in court and Gareth Peirce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia seems to be in the Amir camp

Also, http://blog.thecricketer.com/?p=33536

What kind of woman's name is Gareth??

 

[Prince EWS]

What kind of woman's name is Gareth??

WAGareth.

 

[Furball]

It was illegal and unethical nevertheless. And whether they were undermining the sport or not is highly debatable.
Marlon Samuels was banned for even less and the CA inquiry itself recommended a Ban when this became public in 1999.

To add to that it became clear later that they had alleged links with Pakistani/Indian bookmakers too, through Salim Malik and that they and CA had withheld disclosing the names of Pakistani Cricketers involved in match fixing and having big contacts with Bookmakers, to save themselves and hush up the matter. By the time the Pakistan Judicial commission was formed in 1999 to look into match fixing and these details were disclosed, those Pakistani players were continuing with their illegal activities for 5 years.

Marlon Samuels wasn't banned for less. Associating with bookmakers was far more serious in 2008 than it was in 1992.

 

[Himannv]

What kind of woman's name is Gareth??

According to that link, she was born Jean and changed it to Gareth. Was probably a phase she went through.

As for Amir, Asif and Butt, ban those three ****ers and send them to jail forever.

 

[Howe_zat]

Tino has the best twitter

To See Guys I have Played Intl Crkt Against be Jail for this is Hurting My Heart this Isn't a lol matter

 

[Cevno]

Marlon Samuels wasn't banned for less. Associating with bookmakers was far more serious in 2008 than it was in 1992.

*1994/95

Well you could say that, but there was direct evidence and admission of them taking money to act for the bookmaker vs Samuels having contact with a bookmaker and giving him tips without there being a direct evidence of taking money from someone he disputed he didn't know was a Bookie.

In any case whether or not it was worse than Samuels or not, it doesn't exonerate them or CA of their wrongdoings. And same was said by both the Pakistani Judicial commision and then the CA appointed Rob O'Regan QC player conduct enquiry, while recommending a ""suspension for a significant time". This was said too -

They must have known that it is wrong to accept money from, and supply information to, a bookmaker whom they also knew as someone who betted on cricket. Otherwise they would have reported the incident to team management long ago before they were found out in February 1995. In behaving as they did they failed lamentably to set the sort of example one might expect from senior players and role models for many young cricketers.
—Rob O'Regan

I believe the Pak judicial commission was even more damning.

 

[intcricket]

Marlon Samuels wasn't banned for less. Associating with bookmakers was far more serious in 2008 than it was in 1992.

So a crime in 2008, was a virtue in 1992 by that logic?

 

[Spikey]

Tino has the best twitter

<3 tino

 

[intcricket]

It is just simpler to say that all these players, no matter what country they are from, mine, yours, someone else's, are guilty. I can understand that patriotic sentiments can prevent straightforward acceptance and lead to denial, as is quite visible.

On a personal level, no Indian will ever try to beat around the bush talking about Azhar, Jadeja. Infact, it will be contrary. So I don't see whats the fuss about calling a spade, a spade.

We can't have light sentences coz a player is from "A" country and tougher sentences for a player from "B" country. A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence.