NEWS
SCHEDULES
COLUMNS
PREVIOUS TOURS
OTHER SPORTS
STATISTICS
INTERVIEWS
SLIDE SHOW
ARCHIVES

The Chandrachud Report

The statements made by the other journalists read thus:

a. Mr Aniruddha Bahal, Outlook's principal correspondent.

A cricket match can be fixed. The results of the international matches are in the present times so close that it is enough to fix a few key players. It is not necessary to fix all the 11 players. The match can be fixed not merely by bookies even punters can fix a match. Corruption is a matter of individual susceptibility. A player who has scored a half century has performed well for outward purposes but he may have scored those runs in twice the number of balls when his potential is that he can score 50 runs in 60 balls. Thus, it is difficult to find fault with him by saying that he was involved with any bookie or punter. Many permutations and combinations are involved in good and bad play, that is, a bowler can bowl a few overs very well and then slide off, similarly, the batsman or the wicketkeeper.

It is true that the report in our magazine Outlook regarding the match, of which Mr Prabhakar has spoken, never took place. Even the adjourned match whichwas to be replayed did not take place. That does not mean that Prabhakar's story is baseless.The reason is that bets would be laid or the money can be offered when it was not known or anticipated that the match will not be played. There is a huge amount of betting in the sub continent. In my opinion, there is a lot of betting on cricket in India. Indian players may also be laying bets which does not necessarily mean that they have laid those bets for fixing the match. But, if a player lays a bet, he would naturally adjust his play so that he can win that bet. No one lays a bet to loose it. The fact that Indian players earn a higher amount legally through the board does not mean that they would not be interested in making more money. Its not every good player who makes large money in advertisements or in TV modelling. There are just one or two of that kind. Therefore, the others could well be tempted to make money which is a human trait.

Whatever I have to say on match fixation or the particular matches which were fixed is stated in the article in our magazine Outlook. What we could say openly has been stated by us. Things which can not be published without good evidence have not been published by us.

(>Justice Chandrachud adds: Mr Bahal showed me a letter and a note suggesting match fixing by Indian cricketers.The said letter says that "Lots of bits and pieces of information" was received but was not actionable. The letter says that "very peripheral information" was received from " various sources". "If we had any basis we would have looked for proof." The note speaks of a letter by which information was handed over to a revenue secretary, and the letter could be found of the record of the revenue department. Paragraph 3 of the note says that the gentleman with whom the writer had a talk could not remember the names regarding the involvement of four players who alleged to have been paid of before a match in Sharjah.)

My information tends to show that there is a company in Singapore which organises the Singer Cricket tournament behind the scene and that, an Indian board official was a beneficiary of the proceedings along with three other persons who are closely linked with cricket, one of whom is from Pakistan.

b. Mr Krishna Prasad, Outlook co -correspondent.

Cricket is a subject of my study. I have personal motive in writing the article which appeared in Outlook. I do not say that every international Indian cricket match is fixed. Only some matches are fixed. Outlook has not made any insinuation against any board official even when matches are fixed nor that every cricketer is involved in match fixing. Though betting on cricket is legalised in England and Australia and partly in Sri Lanka , it is frowned upon. It is considered improper to bet.

The board should ask for a declaration from the players of the assets. That may perhaps be too generic. But, one does not know why the board did not try to find whether the assets of some players are wholly disproportionate to their known source of income.

Manoj Prabhakar has brought in the forefront the virus which is eating into the vitals of Indian cricket. Since March 1996, Indian cricketers have been earning large amounts by way of fees. Even then, the assets held by some players are staggering. It is impossible to obtain and furnish proof in black and white of illegal payments made to players. Those who make such payments are highly placed individuals.

A tremendous amount of betting takes place in cricket. Dubai and Karachi have the biggest cartels.

All types of queer characters sit in the players' box and have access to the dressing room. Betting takes place not merely on the final result of the match. There can be betting on the toss, runs scored by a player, catches taken and dropped, the total runs which the team scored and so on.

c. Mr. Lokendra Pratap Sahi, Sports Editor, The Telegraph I think it is possible to fix an international cricket match involving any team. If you watch the matches closely, you will find that some matches take a cetain turn either with the fall of one wicket or even after a couple of overs only. There are some runouts which cannot be explained and 2-3 players are getting out one after the another. Shots which they play are such as they should not have been played in that situation. Some time you find that some bowlers concede as many as 40-50 runs in three overs. Thus the question arises as to why such a thing has happenned?

It is not fair to assume that all matches are fixed or that all players in any particular match are fixed. It cannot be that everyone in the team is fixed. It is the players who are crucial to the side who can be fixed. Like an opening bowler, a key player or even a wicket keeper. That possibility is always there. When a match is fixed only one player is never fixed. It may be 2-3 crucial players who are fixed may get out. By getting out they have done their job. That is say they have done whatever was expected of them or asked of them. If the others pull out the match and the side does well, that is bad luck for the bookies. The bookies will not go for the fringe players in that case their element of risk will increase. The bookies will always have the key players as his target. That is what I believe.

I have been with Telegraph for 15 years. I am its Sports Editor for past five years. I have toured with the Indian team about 20 times, There was a one-day match between India and West Indies, at Kanpur in 1994. I did not cover that. I sent one of my colleagues to cover it.

The way Manoj Prabhakar and Nayan Mongia batted shocked everyone. The reports which appeared in the newspapers next day almost unanimously doubted the integrity of these two players. That is because, in one day match, they were batting as if they were playing in a test match. That is the first time I thought that there is some truth in the allegation that players are involved with bookies. After that match, both Prabhakar and Mongia were dropped out for the next two matches. That was obviously by way of punishment. The general feeling was that their omission from the next two matches had everything to do with their involvement with the bookies.

In early 1995 I went to Sharjah. But before that there was a tournament in New Zealand in which India took part. When the Indian team returned the Indian Express carried a story on the front page quoting the Manager of the Indian team which had toured New Zealand, that the Indian team had six black sheep. That story talked about matches being fixed. For two days after the story, there was no comment from the board. On the third day the manger issued the statement from Vishakapatnam saying that he was misquoted by the paper and that he had not given any information to the Indian Express. The story in the Indian Express had quoted the manager. Since the story in the said paper was not denied immediately by the board or the Mnager I think that there must have been some truth in the report. It is a queer coincidence that the Salim Malik episode occured almost at the same time in which Shane Warne and two other Australian players alleged that S. Malik had offered them a bribe to ensure that Australia lose the match.

After the Kanpur and New Zealand incidents, the public started feeling and became more convinced that there must be some underhand dealing between the players and the bookies.

In 1996, India played in Sahara cup at Toronto. I did not cover that tournament. Therefore, I cannot say what happened during that tour. But I was told by some people in Calcutta after the first match that the first four matches in Toronto were fixed, that the result will be two all and that, the fifth match will be played on merit. As a coincidence, that is exactly what happened. For that, both the teams had to cooperate and some players in the Pakistan team may also have cooperated.

Recently , in some matches, the performance of some members of our team has been shocking and far below expectations. While on circuit, I felt that some players were just not bothered in respect of their own poor and overall failure of the team. It seemed to me as if they were not bothered about it. The fat allowance paid to the Indian players is a recent phenomenon for the last 5-7 years. It is the key player who is targeted by the bookies. He has no fear. Even if he performs poorly for 3-4 matches, he will still be in the team. Being dropped from the team, is what can happen to a fringe player for bad performance but, the bookies never target them. The bookies invest in a player who will be in the team even after 3-4 bad performances. Therefore, a key player does not have much stake in being involved with the bookies for some time at least. After 3-4 bad performances, he may do extremely well and again become a hero before the public. Public memory is very short and if a key player makes a century or takes some wickets, his immediate past poor performance is forgotten by the public.

The bookies target players in important matches where betting stakes are enormous as in matches with Pakistan, West Indies, South Africa , Australia and now Sri Lanka . In key matches, especially with Pakistan, the betting can run into crores of rupees. In England and South Africa, betting on cricket is legalised. In England, there are Ladbroke stalls at all test match centres where any one can bet openly. The odds are publicly displayed on the board at those centres.

The Salim Malik incident took place in February 1995. Five months later, in July 1995, the International Cricket Council , which is the Governing body for cricket, outlawed betting and gambling in the Code of Conduct which has to be followed by every player and official. In fact, one clause was added to the code of Conduct. Clause 9 of the ICC Code of Conduct was added in July 1995 which provides, inter alia, that players and team officials shall not engage, directly or indirectly in betting, gambling or any form of unofficial speculation on the outcome of any cricket match.

I would like to emphasise that it is the key players who are fixed and the key matches. There is no question of fixing a fringe player nor can you fix all players. No bookie would be interested in fixing a match which is unimportant. I am not prepared to say that every player in the team is involved. All I can say is that a couple of key players can be involved. What is important is that a member of the Indian team may place a bet on the result of the match, though he cannot do so because of Code of Conduct. What is important and objectionable is the possible involvement with the bookie and the deliberate poor performance. A player in a team can supply more information to a bookie on the composition of the team, an unpublished injury to a player, which is only known to the team, or state of the wicket. Mobile phones were banned in Pakistan in 1994-95 by the then Manager Inthikhab Alam. The then Indian Manager, Sandeep Patil also banned mobile phones in August 1996. The question naturally arises, why?

d.Bipin Dani, freelance journalist

I say that cricket matches can be fixed . There cannot be smoke without fire. I believe that international Indian cricket matches are fixed. Newspaper reports say that bookies have been arrested. It cannot be false that they are not involved. The bookies will not take bets unless they involve cricketers. Fixing up a match means getting at a few good players. Each and every match cannot be fixed. A match can be fixed by contacting key players. The key players are asked to tell the other players to perform poorly. I have no evidence in support of what I have stated. However, there are some circumstances which support my statement.

Rashid Latif had said that four Indian cricketers used to inquire with him on telephone about climatic prediction, wicket condition, etc. Latif denied this allegation immediately. However , he did not send his denial to the Outlook magazine but sent it to Azaruddin.

More