The Spread of Match Fixing

[Dan]

I've been doing a significant amount of research on match fixing (some of you may have filled out a survey for me in the past), and it got me thinking.

Do you think the ICC caught match fixing in the 1990s and spot fixing in 2010 before it could spread any further? Is it possible that, had Cronje not broken down or Qayuum done so much, that men like Salim Malik would not have been found out, and allowed to continue recruiting players?

Is it possible that, shock horror, News of the World did the cricketing world a service by bringing down Majeed? Do you think spot fixing would have spread the way match fixing did in the 1990s?

A lot of questions, and for that I apologise, but I'm genuinely interested to see what people think about how far it could have gone, or if it would have spread at all.

 

[Prince EWS]

Do you think spot fixing would have spread the way match fixing did in the 1990s?

Definitely, and sadly I'm not convinced it now won't.

 

[fredfertang]

What I wonder is how much publicity this gets in India.

Spot fixing is so straightforward and difficult to detect that I rather doubt, even if it such bets were readily available from bookmakers in the UK, that punters would bet on who is going to open the bowling in a T20, or how many fielders will wear sunnies or even will bowler X concede two boundaries in his first over, simply because they won't trust the book.

I can only assume that in the sub-continent these bets are still attractive so it seems to me that there must be much greater trust on the part of the punters that they do actually have a chance of winning. Why is this? I'm assuming the gamblers aren't thick

I think the only answer is to legalise betting on the sub-continent but outlaw the silly spot-fixing type bets that only need the connivance of one or two players, but that's a matter for governments unfortunately and I don't suppose there is any appetite for change (though that's based on nothing more than a hunch - would be interested in hearing any informed opinion on that particular point)

 

[benchmark00]

I prefer nutella or raspberry jam.

 

[fredfertang]

I prefer nutella or raspberry jam.

I didn't realise that there was a book on your choice of breakfast spread - is the spot-fixing on that profitable?

 

[benchmark00]

I didn't realise that there was a book on your choice of breakfast spread - is the spot-fixing on that profitable?

Have been found guilty of supplying bread conditions before itbt.

 

[vic_orthdox]

The ICC were well aware of spot fixing being the preferred method for a good time before the Pakistan tour of England.

 

[Fusion]

The ICC were well aware of spot fixing being the preferred method for a good time before the Pakistan tour of England.

Indeed. Rashid Latif warned ICC about spot fixing in 2003.

 

[vic_orthdox]

The majority of their education lessons focussed on spot fixing rather than match fixing in 2006.

 

[NasserFan207]

What I wonder is how much publicity this gets in India.

Spot fixing is so straightforward and difficult to detect that I rather doubt, even if it such bets were readily available from bookmakers in the UK, that punters would bet on who is going to open the bowling in a T20, or how many fielders will wear sunnies or even will bowler X concede two boundaries in his first over, simply because they won't trust the book.

I can only assume that in the sub-continent these bets are still attractive so it seems to me that there must be much greater trust on the part of the punters that they do actually have a chance of winning. Why is this? I'm assuming the gamblers aren't thick

I think the only answer is to legalise betting on the sub-continent but outlaw the silly spot-fixing type bets that only need the connivance of one or two players, but that's a matter for governments unfortunately and I don't suppose there is any appetite for change (though that's based on nothing more than a hunch - would be interested in hearing any informed opinion on that particular point)

Not sure why you think gamblers in the subcontinent are any different from gamblers in the UK, they aren't. You'd be amazed what kind of stuff goes on closer to home.

Its almost impossible to regulate this kind of thing in my experience.

 

[Debris]

Considering the whole point of match fixing is to do it in secret, we will never know unless they get caught.

 

[fredfertang]

Not sure why you think gamblers in the subcontinent are any different from gamblers in the UK, they aren't. You'd be amazed what kind of stuff goes on closer to home.

Its almost impossible to regulate this kind of thing in my experience.

In my admittedly limited experience of bookies, all of whom have been of the High Street variety, they don't have books on the sort of bets that lend themselves to spot-fixing - that said I do accept that I might just not have been looking hard enough

 

[uvelocity]

cricketbet.net

jono posts a disturbing pic of Kohli $1.05
spark posts in the wrong thread $1.03
no overhype of players in tour thread for the day $150

 

[AaronK]

it has to be the early 90s and pakistani players were the one who started.. after they were offered a huge sum of money by indian bookies..

the likes of salim malik.. wasim akram.. ijaz ahmad, waqar younis and afew others were so selfish.. self centered.. they would do anything for money and attention.. I think wasim akram and waqar younis should be the experts on spot fixing and match fixing.. because they have done it all.. faked injury.. under performed.. fixed matches and sold their country for dollers throughout their careers.

 

[Cevno]

Spot betting is not particularly popular here in India as well. Actually, the unofficial bookies mostly only offer limited bets on the results.

 

[swede]

What I wonder is how much publicity this gets in India.

Spot fixing is so straightforward and difficult to detect that I rather doubt, even if it such bets were readily available from bookmakers in the UK, that punters would bet on who is going to open the bowling in a T20, or how many fielders will wear sunnies or even will bowler X concede two boundaries in his first over, simply because they won't trust the book.

I can only assume that in the sub-continent these bets are still attractive so it seems to me that there must be much greater trust on the part of the punters that they do actually have a chance of winning. Why is this? I'm assuming the gamblers aren't thick

I think the only answer is to legalise betting on the sub-continent but outlaw the silly spot-fixing type bets that only need the connivance of one or two players, but that's a matter for governments unfortunately and I don't suppose there is any appetite for change (though that's based on nothing more than a hunch - would be interested in hearing any informed opinion on that particular point)

If betting was just made legal, I doubt much more would need to be done as betting patterns could then be monitored raising the alarm if there were unusual amounts of money bet on a "silly" thing to happen. Even the most crooked cricketer would surely not risk this.

 

[wolfeye]

the problem with spot fixing is that players have little or no formal education so when they see a chance to get money they just jump into it