FOR many, many years talk of match-fixing has been heard in cricket. But it is for the first time that any international player has admitted in public that he indeed did accept money from a bookie. But the admission by former South African skipper Hansie Cronje has, in fact, raised more questions rather than answer any. According to Cronje's own admission he received $10,000 to $ 15,000 during the triangular series in South Africa also involving England and Zimbabwe. Why he took the money is difficult o explain since the South African is insisting that he never "threw away any match." Why Cronje did so only time will tell. But more important than this admission is the question: did he indeed accept money from an Indian bookie for throwing away matches while his team was touring India earlier this year ? And it is this question which the Delhi police, who first raised an accusing finger at the South African for accepting money from a bookie, is asking. But the fact remains that the initial denial and subsequent admission by Cronje has let the cat among the pigeons. And as the drama unfolds in the days to come, it is quite likely that more and more names will be revealed. But how deep is the malaise is difficult to fathom, at least at the moment.

But is Hansie Cronje the only player who met the bookies in India? What about the role of opener Herschelle Gibbs, left-arm spinner Nicky Borje and medium-pacer Pieter Strydom whose names also figured in the tapes released by the Delhi police which brought the issue of match-fixing to the fore. In fact, ever since their return to international cricket the South Africans had earned the respect of the cricketing world with their exploits on the fields. But the way they "ch-oked" in vital mat-ches now raises the question whether they lost fairly to better teams or did they throw away the matches for pieces of gold ? A lot of followers of the game will probably now look at their achievements, and losses, with jaundiced eyes. Two recent defeats suffered by the South Africans are difficult to fathom. The first was their loss to Zimbabwe in the World Cup last year and then their loss to Pakistan in the Sharjah tournament very recently. Maybe, the league match was not of vital importance as both teams had made it to the final but no team wants to give up its winning ways. People still remember the Titan Cup final at Mumbai in the month of November, 1996, where after a superb string of successes at the league stage , they ‘choked’ to India in the final.

The issue of match-fixing goes back into decades. It was in the 1980s that Pakistan fast bowler Sarfraz Nawaz set the ball rolling when he accused Asif Iqbal, a very respected cricketer of that time, of match-fixing. Nobody gave any credence to the accusations then. But it was at Sharjah where India and Pakistan took cricket to an "offshore" venue (places like Singapore and Toronto came later) where the charges of match-fixing really came to the fore with teams dishing out results absolutely opposite to their current form. There were howls of protests, including from India, as the national squad more often than not lost to their neighbours. Now it seems that it is not only India and Pakistan who have indulged in this practice which has brought disrepute to the game .

Even after the admission made by Cronje , the situation is far from clear. According to a statement issued by Cronje, the former South African skipper was quoted as saying that "I never received any financial rewards". If he did not get any financial reward why did he get the money from the bookies?

According to the Delhi police , Hansie Cronje was contacted by two Indians bookies, Rajesh Kalra, who has now been arrested, and Sanjay Chawla (the person who actually spoke to Cronje on the telephone), a resident of London who is not traceable , through a South African at Kochi. A deal was struck (the amount being said is believed to be about $500,000 for the series) and the South Africans could well laugh their way to the bank. But what upset the applecart are the sleuths of the Delhi police who not only tape-recorded the conversation between the bookie and the South African skipper, but later lodged an FIR about the misdoings of the players and charged them with criminal conspiracy. To add spice to the whole issue is the role of a Mumbai film personality in the sordid drama. He has admitted that he knew the two bookies.

Till date not a single Indian or Pakistani player has ever been caught redhanded for match-fixing although there has been a lot of insinuations in the air. One must remember that the only other time any player has been caught accepting money from bookies were two "respected" Australians — Shane Warne and Mark Waugh — who took money from an indian bookie for giving "information of the weather" when their team was touring Sri Lanka a few years ago. In this particular case , the Australian Cricket Board exonerated the players after imposing a fine. What is most distressing is the fact that neither the cricket board of Sri Lanka nor that of India , pursued the case which logically they should have done as the bookie was from India and the payment was made in Sri lanka. Why was this so can be answered by the bigwigs in these boards.

No one involved in the game, be it as a player or as an administrator, can deny the growing clout and menace of bookies and money power in cricket in the subcontinent. It has been alleged that whenever India plays anywhere in the world as much as Rs 1000 crore changes hands during the course of a match (and we are here talking of one-day matches). There is, in any case, immense money in cricket in India. Cricket and cricketers in India are "used" not only as a sport but also as tools to sell everything from soft drinks to motor cars and television.

A top player , according to a very rough estimate, earns more than ten times more from activities outside the ground than what he gets for playing for the country. According to a source close to the governing body of the game, the Board of Control for Cricket in India, there is so much of money in the game in this country that year after year India can host the World Cup by giving fabulous guarantee money to the playing teams and the respective boards and outbidding all other cricket-playing countries.

It is for this money power that the International Cricket Council evolved the system of rotation for the World Cup if they had not done so then India could and would have successfully bid for the tournament each time. (And just for the records, the two World Cups held in the subcontinent, the Reliance Cup in 1987 and the Wills Cup in 1996, were both sponsored by Indian firms. Also, the Indian board earns fabulous sums from the sponsors for all international matches played in the country.) And again for the records, an Indian player stands to earn as much as Rs 1 lakh for every one-day tie he plays for the country. What he earns as "extra" has already been explained. Therefore, it can be said that there is a lot of money to be made from the game in India. So what if some players pick up some more money, maybe illegally, by agreeing to match-fixing?

In any case it is the Indian bookie who surfaces every time the issue of match-fixing is discussed, be it in India or England or the West Indies. Some people point to the role of an Indian bookie who raked in millions in the World Cup match in England when Pakistan lost to Bangladesh in a league match. But in that match the Pakistanis had already assured their berth in the second round of the tournament and losing to Bangladesh did not have any effect on their overall standing. But in the bargain somebody picked up some cool millions!

The South Africans came to India to take on a totally demoralised home squad which had been whipped in all depart-ments in Australia. Not only had the Indians lost the three-match Test series by 3-0 but they managed to win just one match in the three-nation triangular series involving Pakistan besides India and Australia. More important, the Indian skipper, Sachin Tendulkar, who had taken over from Mohammad Azharuddin immediately after the World Cup in England, wanted to give up his job on return of the team from Australia and just concentrate on his batting. Sachin’s announcement sent shock waves in Indian cricketing circles and the national selectors asked Sachin to lead the squad in the two Tests against the tourists before the job was given to Saurav Ganguly for the five-match Pepsi series which has now gained the focus of attention of the entire cricketing world.

Just for a moment, let us accept that the South Africans did indeed accept money for throwing the first two matches of the series in order to pick up some "easy" money. Hansie Cronje’s mental calculations could have been that his team was so strong as compared to India that they could afford to lose the first two matches and still win the remaining three matches to wrap up the series. And once you win a series, very few questions are asked. In any case the visitors had won the Test series 2-0, becoming the first team in 14 years to win a series against India at home.The ploy (if one can term it so) worked as the visitors first lost the Kochi match, when the hosts overhauled the imposing South African total of 301, with only two deliveries to spare. Chapter one of the alleged deal between the South Africans and the bookie had been completed ! On to Jamshedpur where the South Africans, who were batting first, were skittled out for 199 and the hosts romped home with six wickets and over two overs to spare. The deal with the bookies had been met. The visitors won the match at Faridabad (played just the day after the alleged telephonic conversation between the bookie and Hansie Cronje) to put the series in right focus. But the hosts upset all the calculations by winning the Vadodara tie by four wickets to seal the series 3-2 and the result of the match at Nagpur (which the South Africans won) had no bearing on the series. On the surface it seemed that the Indians won the first two matches fair and square but the question that crops up is: how did the big transformation come about in the home squad within days of suffering such humiliating defeats, not only in Australia but also in India.And the players in both cases were nearly the same!

One question which must logically be asked is: Why did the bookies contact the South Africans and not the Indians ? Would it not have been easier for the bookies to contact the Indians especially since the series was being played at home. But then India were a losing side and who would put money on a losing horse, as a former player put it. It is only when the stronger team loses (maybe deliberately) that the bookies make a killing. But there are whispers that a certain Indian player was also involved in the deal. It is quite possible that this Indian player was "used" by the bookies to approach the South Africans.

But then one must not forget that in any "fixed’ match the captain has a vital role to play. It is he who decides on the batting order (and he can bungle it without any eyebrows being raised) as also the bowling and field placings. Therefore, if the South Africans did indeed throw away the first two matches then it is obvious that Hansie Cronje did have a major role. But the questions which comes up again and again is: did Hansie throw away all his national honour for money? The Delhi police say yes while the South Africans say no.

What must come in for sharp criticism in the whole drama is the role of the Board of Control for Cricket in India in the whole match-fixing drama. Long, long ago, in 1997 to be precise, when the issue of match-fixing was being so hotly debated and discussed, Manoj Prabhakar went on record to say that an Indian player had offered to pay him Rs 25 lakh for playing below par in the Singer Cup in Colombo in 1994. At that time Manoj Prabhakar was a major player in the national squad. At that time( for the records) Mohammad Azharuddin was the captain of the team and Ajit Wadekar, who later went on to become a national selector, was the manager of the squad The board set up a committee under former Supreme Court Chief Justice Y.V. Chand-rachud in the wake of the allegations but the report submitted by Justice Chandrachud to the board was never made public. Manoj’s allegations, it seems, were not taken seriously by the board although the issue kept cropping up time and again in the media. But what the board Secretary, J.Y. Lele, did after the issue of the South Africans surfaced must take the cake. Talking to a television channel from his hometown of Baroda, Lele termed as "rubbish" the charges of match-fixing filed by the Delhi police against the South African players. "As far as we are concerned there is nothing. As far as we are concerned everything is okay, there is nothing wrong," he was quoted as saying. Why did he take such a line even as the Delhi police reaffirmed that it had enough evidence under wraps is difficult to fathom? Or does the board have skeletons in its own cupboard? The board President, A.C.Muthiah, has taken a more cautious approach. He is waiting for the working committee of the Board to discuss the issue threadbare and only then it is hoped he will make a pronouncement.

Where does cricket go from here, not only in India but worldwide? If the Delhi police can prove their charges then curtains will finally be drawn on the murky world of match-fixing and the game can be played and decided on the playfields instead of in the shady world of wheelers and dealers. But in case the police charges fall flat on the face, it could well kill the goose that has over the years laid the proverbial golden eggs not only in India but worldwide.

If that were to happen much of the blame would fall on the International Cricket Council. The international body has done nothing even in cases where there was clear evidence (as in the case of Shane Warne and Steve Waugh of receiving money from a bookie for giving information on the weather). In fact, that was the time for the council to act, crack the whip and hand out exemplary punishment so that no international player dared to bring the game to disrepute. By allowing things to drift, the council now has very little means to stem the rot afflicting international cricket even as the game travels to every corner of the globe.

How the bookies operate

These days, sources allege, even groundsmen and gatekeepers are involved in match-fixing and betting, what to talk of the actual players of the game, says M.S. Unnikrishnan

PEOPLE at large do not really know what exactly match-fixing is, and how one goes about the job, for it to be accomplished.

The obvious choice is to prevail upon the captain, coach or manager to get the deed done. Key players are also, allegedly, drafted to be "co or key-conspirators" to the game of betting and match-fixing. There are also scores of others, who, on the face of it, may look marginal men, but people in the know of things "swear" that they provide the basic, and the most vital inputs, for the bigger players to manip- ulate..

With cricket attracting sponsors by the droves, millions and millions of rupees (dollars, if you please) are being poured into the game, making it one of the most lucrative sports to be played in the subcontinent. So everyone wants to have his finger in the big pie. With the advent of one-day cricket, which provides "instant satisfaction" to the cash customers, big players in the betting business have dug in their claws very deep, to gain a larger pound of flesh, by hook or crook. These days, sources allege, even groundsmen and gatekeepers are involved in match-fixing and betting, what to talk of the actual players of the game.

In Delhi, it’s a common sight to see all and sundry crowd around the pitch, on the eve of a one-day game or Test match. For an innocent cricket lover, such a sight is nothing more than an aberration, a nuisance, but knowledgeable people say that most of those who crowd around when the pitch is being given the "finishing touches" before a major one-dayer, or Test match, are the agents of bookies who are either trying to "read" the pitch themselves, or to strike up the right contact to glean vital information.

A source narrated this interesting incident about a cellphone-weilding, grumpy-looking, middle-aged man desperately searching for the curator of the Ferozeshah Kotla pitch on the eve of the India-Australia one-day match last year, when the curator himself was standing only a few feet away from this gentleman. When questioned about the purpose of his presence on the ground, and whether he was known to the curator, our friend made a hasty exit, and merged into the pavilion corridors.

On another occasion, disclosed the source, a hefty-looking man approached a couple of VIP spectators while they were rushing into the stadium, with a request to tell the groundsman to come out and meet him after the match had begun, because it was "very urgent".

A source revealed that "betting is done till the last ball is bowled", but as far as match-fixing is concerned, though everyone knows it is rampant, no one has been pinned down with any concrete evidence. "Delhi," the source said, "has now become a den of betting and match-fixing" though the modus operandi varies from the straight to the bizarre. Most operations are done through telephonic conversations, but a direct deal is also the "in-thing" in Delhi.

Influential, and even ordinary people, are approached to "provide information" in exchange for pecuniary considerations. The information sought is about the nature of the pitch, how it will behave as the match progresses, the individual form of the players, whether any player is injured, the sort of food eaten by each player, whether a player is vegetarian or non-vegetarian, so on and so forth. "They (the bookies) are there everywhere. They try to glean all the information possible, before a match," said the source.

And during a match, a dropped catch, a ridiculous run out, or falling short of a reachable total are all attributed to the "cash call" of the bookies. Money is also wagered on whether a particular star will make 100 runs or get out at 60 runs. "In such cases, a combination of match-fixing and betting is involved", alleged the source, "because influencing a star player takes a lot of effort". But in the Hansie Cronje incident, a whole lot of unanswered questions have cropped up.

By whom, when and how was a suspicious finger pointed at Cronje? What is India’s problem anyway since he lost the series in India? What is the proof of Cronje having received slush money? The pertinent one is, did the whole thing come out just because a rival syndicate that might have heavily wagered on a South African series victory lost out money? Or is there somebody out there who wanted to scuttle the proposed tour of the South African team, led by Hansie Cronje, to play a series of benefit matches?

Cronje’s XI was to play an Indian XI led by Mohammad Azharuddin in benefit matches at Mohali, Hyderabad, Chennai and Bangalore, and the matches were being sponsored by a Hyderabad-based event management company. Could it be that somebody wanted to stop this tour?

An indignant former cricketer said "they—the match-fixers and their colluder —have sold their conscience, cricket and country for a sixer.But I hope the Cronje incident has put the fear of God into the mind of the players, to deter them from betting and match-fixing in future". One fervently hopes, it has.