Anatomy of spot fixing

Betting has been in vogue since man invented competitive sport. People naturally took sides and cheered their teams to success. A few enterprising folks saw an opportunity to make money by using their superior knowledge of the game and factors that influenced a games outcome. An expert in the game of horse racing would know everything about the horses, jockeys and other circumstances based on which he could come up with the odds in favour or against a particular horse. Those who had a contrary view would then challenge our punter and you have a bet. Informed betting usually made money for the better and he would argue that he is actually investing and not betting. The parallel to investing in stock markets is obvious, only in case of the latter; the bets have been traditionally called investment. All forms of speculative investments whether in the stock market or at the turf, is gambling. And, betting is not a crime

Now, while it is not possible to predict a winning horse or predict a stock to touch a certain high with 100% certainty, it is definitely possible for an insider, somebody who has the ability influence the fortunes of the horse or a stock, to ensure that the horse does not win a particular race or the stock does not reach the high on a specified date or a touches a new high, defying all analysis. The insider could be a trainer or jockey, an official handing mergers and acquisitions in an Investment bank, a bureaucrat or minister who form policies  etc.

In team sports, betting is a different ballgame.  This is because the variables that determine the outcome of a match are many. So it is generally difficult to fix the outcome of soccer, field hockey, basketball matches etc, unless the entire team with the team management is fixed. And such things have happened.   However the new brand of betting, viz., spot betting (and fixing), seems to be entirely native to cricket. Being the type of sport it is, cricket lends itself amenable to spot fixing. This is because even though a team sport, at any given point in time, only one player is in action. Even here, a bowler is the best target for spot fixing, because the bowler initiates a chain of events. Everything in cricket happens after a ball is bowled. So to spot fix that the third ball in the bowler’s second over will be no ball,  is very easy. Only the bowler needs to be compromised. Ditto for wides, full tosses etc.

But to spot fix a bowler to give away x runs in an over is impossible by compromising only the bowler. Such a fix is more complicated to achieve and will require more than just the bowler to be compromised. Actually a fixer will need to create what I would call,  a fixnet, a net containing of all individuals who will work together to make the fix succeed. The bare minimum individuals in a fixnet are two, the bowler and the batsman.  With just the bowler, you can not guarantee that x runs will be scored. The bowler can only bowl, somebody has to hit him for runs (and hope that some super fielder does not field it). If we view all cricket spot fixing scandals, the ones that were proved were the ones where the fix required only the bowler. Given this background, how can one say that only the RR bowlers were involved in the scandal? There has to be some batsmen as well as part of the fixnet. If I am the bowler being compromised, I would definitely insure myself against this possibility when dealing with bookies. As bowler I can bowl a length ball, the batsman has to still hit it and the batsman’s non conversion can not be my fault. It is naïve to assume that the accused bowlers of RR would not have thought about this. Even more so the bookie.

As such, I do believe that the fixnet is much bigger that just three or four bowlers. A lot of batsmen should also be involved and many of these batsmen could belong to teams that didn’t do particularly well in this IPL. 

Umpiring, particularly by local umpires, has left much to be desired.  If we accept the possibility of a fixnet, umpires could also be part of this net. Otherwise it would be very difficult to explain the many decisions, particularly the inconsistencies on wide calls outside the off stump, some shocking lbw and caught behind decisions. One can of course argue that the umpires were plain incompetent for the sake or argument.

Is this something that can be stopped? Unfortunately no. We can create laws that make influencing the outcome of a match or an event in a sport/game punishable. But then, we have had laws against insider trading in financial markets all along. But insider trading still happens and occasionally somebody is convicted.

As long as greed for money drives man, all kinds of fixing will thrive , in markets, inside board rooms, in sports and sports bodies and everywhere where money is at stake. Unless we as a nation react to this strongly, nothing will change. For starters we can strip BCCI of its power, by boycotting Indian cricket until the government comes up some concrete measures to rein in this menace that is threatening the game of cricket. This will be a  patriotic thing too to do.

Trial By Media - Spot Fixing in IPL

While the whole of India will agree or will be brainwashed to agree with what the media says, based on the so called evidences that they seem to possess, I would like to be the devil's advocate here and raise a contrary view to what is publicly accepted in this matter

About 20 years ago, time was when I and my wife would eagerly wait for 10 PM , Friday,  to arrive every week. Doordarshan had a 30(or was it 60) minutes capsule called 'The World this week'. This used to be an absolutely amazing program with  razor sharp, BBC like presentation by Prannoy Roy, Vinod Dua, Appan Menon et al that gave a glimpse of what quality programming can be like to people who were till then fed with an insipid fare by Doordarshan. This program eventually transformed in to NDTV, one of the most viewed media channels today.

The success of NDTV and the satellite revolution saw the word bared threadbare in our living rooms. New channels came up everyday like mushrooms during monsoon, catering to every section of the society. Competition among channels serving similar content became intense and TRP ratings became the most coveted number to be sought after for improving both top and bottom lines. It did not matter if what was reported was hearsay, canard or even somebody’s figment of imagination; all that mattered was that it gave the channel the eye balls. In my childhood if a man was bitten by a dog, he would take the necessary treatment and nobody would be wiser. Today it is ‘breaking news’. Such is the lure of the TRP.

It is in this context that we need to analyze the relentless bombardment these days  in the media on IPL Spot fixing  and impassioned calls from ‘holier than thou’ TV anchors for BCCI chief’s resignation. One channel even went to the extent of seeking Suresh Kalmadi’s opinion whether the BCCI chief should resign. I wonder who is more credible, Mr. Kalmadi or the TV Channel. The point is, channels go to any ridiculous extend to achieve their only goal, highest TRP ratings. Any amount of exaggeration, insinuation, innuendo or even direct character assassination is acceptable to these media when at stake is the coveted TRP rating. No wonder then, that the hapless trio of players alleged of spot fixing is battered so badly by the media for an offence,that is betting, that is not even punishable under the Indian Penal Code. This is akin to bullying a small kid knowing fully well that the latter can’t retaliate. For sure all three will be aquitted because as of now there is no law under which these three can be convicted.As such nothing will be proved in court.  Will the media offer an apology with the same fervor that it showed in castigating them when te court aquits the players? Fat chance!

It would be naive to assume that the police did not know that betting is not an offence under IPC. Unless the police prove some other offence against all the accused, everybody arrested will be acquitted, even if spot fixing charges are proved. So it is reasonable to assume that the police is investigating something deeper. Then why did they leak this info prematurely and name a few scapegoats  they know will be acquitted eventually? May be to alert the real culprits so that the latter can cover their tracks? 

Most of the evidence that seems to be available is coming from people with questionable integrity. Take the case of Gurunath Meiyappan. Vindoo Dara Singh, a man of suspect reputation, names the former and the media wants everybody Mr. Gurunath is a relative of to resign from any office of importance. What if Vindoo Dara Singh is lying?  How did the media get this information? Did the police leak this deliberately to the media knowing fully well that they can not prove anything in court on their own, and therefore build some public opinion against the accused?

The point then is this. If the players are acquitted and/or if Mr. Gurunath is acquitted, which looks like the most likely outcome, where is the case for asking the BCCI chief to resign?  Apparently the media does not believe ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ should apply to these folks?  

The only think we can demand from Srinivasan as resignation on moral grounds , owning responsibility as the BCCI chief for everything that is related to cricket in India. But then the same applies to everybody holding public office. Why is the Home Minister S K Shinde not being asked to step down for what happened in Chattisghad? Media has always been soft on politicians in power for obvious reasons.

It is with a great sense of nostalgia that I go back to the times of ‘word this week’ where media used to report facts and only unbiased facts.