Spot Fixing?

[meninblue]

Well done by Bangladesh board. I am wondering which countries domestic matches apart from Bangladesh,England, India and Pakistan are also fixed.

[Alviro Patterson]

ICC umpires caught in spot fixing sting by Indian television

http://www.indiatvnews.com/sports/crick ... -6618.html

[dan08]

ICC umpires caught in spot fixing sting by Indian television

http://www.indiatvnews.com/sports/crick ... -6618.html

I know Sting No. 8 is definitely false as Dhaka Gladiators didn't even have a media manager.

@Saj_PakPassion: "Spoke a few minutes ago with a source close to the Dhaka Gladiators who stated that Dhaka did not have a media manager at the #BPL"

[Making_Splinters]

The Court of Arbitration for Sports is set to hear the appeals of Butt and Asif against their bans from the ICC this February.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Seem to be internet rumours over the fixing of the Pak/Ind WC semi. But nothing on news sites yet.

[Arthur Crabtree]

The Court of Arbitration for Sports is set to hear the appeals of Butt and Asif against their bans from the ICC this February.

They've been found guilty by a law court, and an independent ICC committee. What can the CAS do? If these players play international cricket before their bans are complete, the credibility of the games they play in will be undermined, people won't watch the games, and the ICC will have lost what little control of the game it has.

[ddb]

Seem to be internet rumours over the fixing of the Pak/Ind WC semi. But nothing on news sites yet.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricke ... fixed.html If you want to believe something enough, you can twist a set of events to suit that.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Not a great article. You could say that the 'script' is a predictable pattern chasing a decent total in an ODI. Seems like another accusation full of theory and short of evidence.

[rich1uk]

for me there would just have to be too many people involved to fix a match to that degree and i wouldn't even want to think that might be possible

[Arthur Crabtree]

Not clear if both sides are involved. Admit I didn't get right to the end as it was so annoyingly written. But if India are to get 260+, does that mean Pakistan allow them to score that many on a difficult pitch, or India restrict themselves to that many on a good pitch?

[rich1uk]

Not clear if both sides are involved. Admit I didn't get right to the end as it was so annoyingly written. But if India are to get 260+, does that mean Pakistan allow them to score that many on a difficult pitch, or India restrict themselves to that many on a good pitch?

obviously talking very hypothetically here but to get that degree of accuracy then both sides would have to be involved imo and/or a very high number of players on at least one side

its not like fixing a no ball here or there where that can be contained to a small number of players, maybe even just one. and the more people involved the less chance it can be kept secret and the more it costs to get the "fix". thats why i just dont think something like this can be credible.

[ddb]

He frees India of any blame:

I checked the scorecard. He was wrong about India losing three wickets in the first 15 overs and his prediction was out by a single run for a total of more than 260. This would be enough to exonerate India from wrongdoing.

btw this story was already discussed on PP in March 2011. http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showt ... ?p=3695245 http://i.min.us/ikgZTC.jpg

[Arthur Crabtree]

So apart from the journo, who does inventing a fix benefit? Do these just flare up like wildfires? Or do bookies use these suggestions to procure bets? Just hypothetical questions. But it might be that there are dozens of suggested fixes, and the ones remembered or reported are the ones that most nearly match what happened. Like horoscopes.

[sussexpob]

So apart from the journo, who does inventing a fix benefit? Do these just flare up like wildfires? Or do bookies use these suggestions to procure bets? Just hypothetical questions. But it might be that there are dozens of suggested fixes, and the ones remembered or reported are the ones that most nearly match what happened. Like horoscopes.

Put simply, even if 22 players were united in fixing a game, it would be too hard to manufacture such a fixed outcome without being blatent. Its like the accusations that were proved against Cronje and others were all obvious and controllable things, such as opening the bowler with a part timer or only bowling a front line bowler 4 overs in a match. They are the fringe elements that spread betting comes down to, so if you bet that say Shaun Pollock would only go for less than 17 runs in a ODI at massive odds, you whipped him out the attack after 2 overs and the high level bet would be correct.

IIRC, Gibbs had admitted to being asked to get out for 15 by Cronje, but he had been bowled in the first over for a duck.... even if he wanted to throw his wicket away, the still had to survive to that point, which he was unable to do, so the whole fix did not match,

[Making_Splinters]

So apart from the journo, who does inventing a fix benefit? Do these just flare up like wildfires? Or do bookies use these suggestions to procure bets? Just hypothetical questions. But it might be that there are dozens of suggested fixes, and the ones remembered or reported are the ones that most nearly match what happened. Like horoscopes.

Put simply, even if 22 players were united in fixing a game, it would be too hard to manufacture such a fixed outcome without being blatent. Its like the accusations that were proved against Cronje and others were all obvious and controllable things, such as opening the bowler with a part timer or only bowling a front line bowler 4 overs in a match. They are the fringe elements that spread betting comes down to, so if you bet that say Shaun Pollock would only go for less than 17 runs in a ODI at massive odds, you whipped him out the attack after 2 overs and the high level bet would be correct.

IIRC, Gibbs had admitted to being asked to get out for 15 by Cronje, but he had been bowled in the first over for a duck.... even if he wanted to throw his wicket away, the still had to survive to that point, which he was unable to do, so the whole fix did not match,

He made 70 odd in that match.