Board’s Anti-corruption Unit officers grill Mohd Shami’s wife
KOLKATA:FOUR officials of the Anticorruption Unit of the BCCI arrived in Kolkata on Saturday to speak to Mohammad Shami’s wife Hasin Jahan. They are investigating charges of match-fixing against the pacer.
Earlier this week, Jahan had alleged that Shami had taken money from a Pakistani woman named Alishba on the insistence of an England-based businessman, Mohammad Bhai.
The BCCI officials went to the Kolkata Police headquarters at Lalbazar in central Kolkata where Jahan was summoned.
According to police officers, , the BCCI officials spoke to Jahan for more than three hours.
“BCCI officials spoke to her at Lalbazar. The sessions continued for more than three hours,” confirmed Zakir Hussain, Jahan’s lawyer.
On March 14, the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators (COA) wrote to the BCCI to investigate the charges levelled against the pace bowler by his wife.
The COA gave a seven-day deadline to BCCI’S ACU head Neeraj Kumar to submit a report. Shami’s central contract with the BCCI has kept been kept on hold.
Jahan grabbed headlines when she brought a number of criminal charges against her husband. The suspension of Kagiso Rabada and the resultant appeal has once again highlighted misbehaviour on the cricket field.
The two main forms of this unruly behaviour are incessant and inane chatter from the fielding side and the successful bowler giving the dismissed batsmen a send-off. Both forms of misbehaviour are uncalled for and should be eradicated.
This won’t occur until all concerned - players, coaches, umpires and administrators stop saying that chatter is “a part of the game”. My first response to anyone making that declaration would be, “Show me where it is stated in the law book”.
There is a place for gamesmanship, which has been around since the days of Dr WG Grace and the odd abrasive comment will occur in the heat of the moment. Other than that, batsmen are entitled to peace and quiet out in the middle and if it’s not forthcoming, umpires should ensure calm is restored.
Prior to the South Africa series, the Australian team was reported as saying they might bait Rabada. At the time he was close to the required number of demerit points for suspension and Australia’s comments should’ve immediately raised the antennae of the match officials. Why the captains and coaches of both sides weren’t immediately warned against that course of action is strange.
Then South Africa reacted in similar vein when David Warner reached a critical point on the demerit scale after his altercation with Quinton de Kock. On that occasion, the riot act was read to both teams but why aren’t the officials pro-active instead of reactive?
Australia have been at the centre of many of these storms and their constant on-field badgering of batsmen is tantamount to bullying. Workplace bullying is increasingly frowned upon in the wider community but in cricket, either the officials don’t consider these actions to be of that level or they don’t regard the cricket field as a workplace. Either conclusion is wrong.
This form of badgering gives Australia an advantage against probably all sides except South Africa, since the two teams experience a lot of this behaviour in their first-class competitions.
It surprises me that teams like India choose to respond to Australian taunts in a similar manner. A well-timed smile or chuckle from someone as cerebral as Rahul Dravid would have a far more damming effect. There’s nothing a bully hates more than to be laughed at.
The fact that some of the ‘gentler’ nations choose to respond in kind to the Australian tactics should be a warning signal to officials that they need to clamp down hard before words escalate into something physical.