Troubling questions on ‘fixing’ remain

Five names — T.P, Sudhindra, Shalab Srivastava, Amit Yadav, Mohnish Mehta and Abhinav Bali — that would not set a cricket fan’s imagination alive have nevertheless captured the headlines in the past 24 hours. In acting against them following a television channel’s sting operation, the Board of Control for Cricket in India has sought to send out a strong message that playing fast and loose with the rules can be costly. Madhya Pradesh seamer Sudhindra, top wicket-taker in the 2011-12 Ranji Trophy season, is out for life, Srivastava of UP banned for five years and lesser punishments imposed on the other three. The news broke during the last IPL season and inevitably became linked with the tournament but the alleged transgressions had more to do with domestic cricket. In a sense, the BCCI was left with no other choice than to make an example of the five cricketers, especially after its anti-corruption investigator Ravi Sawant came up with a report that confirmed the TV channel’s initial allegations.

At the same time, the episode does raise more than a few questions. Even as charges of match-fixing have swirled around Indian cricket for over a decade now, it was still an investigation by reporters of a TV channel that led to the revelations. By itself, the establishment, be it the BCCI or the International Cricket Council on a larger stage, has simply been unable to come up with a single concrete instance of a probe initiated and carried through by official agencies. Two, how proper or correct is it to condemn the five cricketers who were clearly entrapped — approached with an offer and thereafter snared — by the channel. While they are clearly guilty of agreeing to bend the rules, would it have happened at all if there was no sting? At the same time, the channel’s investigation also revealed how easy it would be for someone unscrupulous enough to try and influence a cricket match. In that sense alone, the cricket board’s step is justified as it signals that tampering in cricket matches can extract a heavy price. What will be worrying for the establishment worldwide is the frequency with which these reports are popping up — in England, in Pakistan, and now India. Equally worrying is the fact that the five punished by the BCCI are relatively insignificant cricketers, and underlines what those concerned with the health of the game have been saying — that making the dangers of fiddling with matches and their results must be made clear to cricketers at the very formative stage itself.