International Cricket Category

7

✩ December 15th, 2011 ✩

Did Amir wrong cricket, or did cricket wrong Amir?

482 Views

Mohammad Amir - A young man that needs to get back on the straight and narrow

Almost two months into their sentences, there’s been much debate about whether Mr Justice Cooke got the sentences right for Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir. Yet certainly in Amir’s case, this isn’t about the length of sentence or the punishment itself, even.

If his sentence does not reform him, then Amir may have been a corrupt cheater, but the failings against him would have been far worse – and that’s without considering how such a young, talented man was failed before the spot-fixing scandal broke.

Justice should not be just about punishment. Real justice should have an element of rehabilitation to it. It’s not only about the punishment, but more importantly, it’s about the lesson. Will the custodial sentences handed out to Butt, Asif and Amir teach them that what they did was wrong? In Butt and Asif’s case, I’m not really bothered, but Mohammed Amir will have many years ahead of him in cricket, and his sentence would have needed to act as education to him too.

In an interview with Sky Sports News a while ago, Michael Atherton spoke about how Amir should be given a second chance and welcomed back into cricket after he has served his sentence and ICC ban. I would be inclined to agree with that, but Amir would have to have fundamentally changed as a person by then.

Throughout the scandal, up until the court case, Amir along with Butt and Asif has been pleading his innocence despite all the evidence against him. Even now, we still hear interviews from the families of all three men, saying how their sons are innocent and haven’t done anything wrong. How can this be?

Read the rest of this entry »

2

✩ November 1st, 2011 ✩

Butt and Asif guilty on all charges, as news emerges of Amir’s guilty plea

365 Views

Salman Butt and Mohammed Asif have both been found guilty on the charges of conspiracy to cheat and conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments. Earlier this morning, the jury had reached its verdict on both charges with regards to Salman Butt, yet were sent out to deliberate again on the charge of conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments in regards to Asif, since agreement could not be reached. In the last hour, they returned a guilty verdict on this charge also.

Both Butt and Asif were found guilty by a unanimous verdict in regards to the charge of conspiracy to cheat, and by a 10-2 majority verdict in regards to the charge of conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments.

The three players now await sentencing

Conspiracy to cheat carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison and/or an unlimited fine. Conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments carries the heavier sentence of up to seven years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.

The judge will now consider the verdict before the sentences will be pronounced later this week. In the mean time, both players remain on bail.

It has also emerged that Mohammed Amir had pleaded guilty to the charges on September the 16th, yet the news was not allowed to be reported due to court restrictions in place that would prevent the verdict of jurors from being unfairly influenced in regards to Butt and Asif.

At the time, Amir’s barrister Ben Emmerson QC said “Amir wants to make it clear he wants to take full responsibility for what he did by bowling two deliberate no-balls. This vulnerable 18-year-old boy

Read the rest of this entry »

0

✩ October 27th, 2011 ✩

Could Butt and Asif end up in prison?

259 Views

Likely custodial sentences will come as a shock to the players

The jury in the spot fixing case has currently retired to consider its verdict, leaving many Pakistan fans wondering about the nature of any possible sentence should Salman Butt and Mohammed Asif be found guilty.

The two players in court are facing charges of conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments and conspiracy to cheat. Mohammed Amir and agent Mazhar Majeed had themselves earlier this year pleaded guilty to the charges.

Obtaining and accepting corrupt payments is an offence contrary to section 1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906. It carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. Cheating is an offence contrary to section 42 of the Gambling Act 2005. It carries a maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.

The maximum sentence for the above two offences does not only apply to the offence itself, but also to the conspiracy to commit such an offence, as is alleged in the case of Butt and Asif. So which kind of sentence are the players likely to receive?

The first thing we would have to consider is whether the duo is likely to be found guilty of the alleged offences. Personally, I feel that the writing is on the wall for a number of reasons. The ICC has already found them guilty of spot fixing and handed out their punishments. Though far from a legal court, their investigations must have had some proof to go on for them to hand out such long term bans.

Then there is the fact that both Amir and Majeed have admitted to spot fixing i.e. basically admitting that a crime had taken place. Their confession therefore implies that Butt and Asif would have been involved to some degree. Before sending the jury out to deliberate, Justice Cooke’s direction to aid the jury in their decision making was: “You can proceed on the basis that Majeed and Amir were involved in the spot-fixing at Lord’s, as all parties agree that is the case”.

Read the rest of this entry »

0

✩ October 25th, 2011 ✩

No Honour in Aiming Low to Avoid Disappointment

378 Views

Mohsin Khan - A defensive minded coach?

What I saw last Saturday is something I never want associated with Pakistan cricket, and neither is it something I would want to see in sport in general, or in any contest for that matter. To not even try, however small the chance of victory, defies the purpose of playing any sport.

As the Pakistan batsmen came out to bat needing 170 off 21 overs in the final innings of the first Test against Sri Lanka, their fans around the world sat riveted to their TV screens, anticipating an enthralling run chase. But as ball after ball was blocked, it was obvious that going for the win was not what was discussed amongst the Pakistan team management in the interval.

When asked after the game, interim coach Mohsin Khan’s response was “…we felt we didn’t want to make a mess of things…We decided that given the field set, we would opt to bat out time”. Now this is in stark contrast to what the coach was saying just a few days earlier. When speaking of the ‘successful risk’ the Pakistan selectors had taken in picking a young squad for the recent tour of Zimbabwe, Khan said “To achieve a big goal, you have to take risks…As a selector, or now a coach, I won’t be afraid of taking a risk”. Easier said than done, right Mohsin?

Read the rest of this entry »

17

✩ March 1st, 2011 ✩

More double standards from the ICC

66 Views

The ICC - Different rules for different teams

It has been reported that the ICC’s anti-corruption and security unit (ACSU) may be investigating Australia’s World Cup game against Zimbabwe after the Australians got off to a uncharacteristically slow start to their innings. When supposedly pressed on the matter, cricinfo reports that the “ICC said it did not comment on any ACSU matter, including whether or not a match had been investigated”. Really?

Back in September you may remember how there was a second round of allegations that followed the News of the World sting, that the Pakistan team were match-fixing. This time it was the Sun Newspaper, which had apparently handed over evidence to ACSU. The ICC’s response then was to go public on the matter, telling the media that Pakistan were being investigated by ACSU again, and remarkably, this was even before informing the PCB itself. So why the double standards? Why the hush-hush when it comes to the Australians but the indiscreet nonchalance when it came to the Pakistanis? Let’s remember, the Pakistan team, which did not include the suspended trio of Asif, Amir and Butt, were found completely innocent of the allegations in the end, despite having to cope with a trial by media due to the ICC’s blunder.

Read the rest of this entry »

6

✩ October 26th, 2010 ✩

Pak v S. Africa, 1st, 2nd Twenty20

43 Views

1st T20 teams:

Pakistan: Shahzaib Hasan, Imran Farhat, Mohammad Hafeez, Umar Akmal, Misbah-ul-Haq, Shahid Afridi*, Abdul Razzaq, Zulqarnain Haider†, Umar Gul, Saeed Ajmal, Shoaib Akhtar

South Africa: GC Smith, LL Bosman, AB de Villiers†, JP Duminy, CA Ingram, DA Miller, JA Morkel, J Botha*, M Morkel, J Theron, LL Tsotsobe

Pakistan go in as expected although I personally would have opted for Shafiq instead of Farhat. Kallis and Steyn are missing for South Africa which is a big loss. Pakistan should consider themselves favourites.

2nd T20 teams:

Both sides go in with the same 11. Typical of Pakistan’s recent selections, as they fail to make the required brave changes.

Read the rest of this entry »

6

✩ September 30th, 2010 ✩

ECB & ICC chicken out

71 Views

Ijaz Butt multi-tasks: On the phone and reading the newspaper upside down at the same time. Isn't Pakistan cricket lucky?!

Ijaz Butt’s outburst was a real chance for the ECB and ICC to do something for Pakistan cricket in helping to remove Butt from his position as captain of the Pakistan ship. But a simple apology from Butt means that all is well and good once again. For the ECB, ICC and Ijaz Butt, it is at least, but under Butt’s command the Pakistan ship continues to drift into rough seas towards rocky shores.

I was hoping that Butt would be stubborn as usual and refuse to apologise, forcing the ECB to take him to court, and the ICC to suspend him. But deep down there was a feeling that he would retract his comments with a grovelling apology in a desperate attempt to hold onto his position. Self-preservation has always been Ijaz Butt’s main goal.

The ICC, it is believed, were ready to suspend Butt yet preferred to give him time to retract his comments and issue an apology. The head of each ICC member board automatically becomes an ICC Director, and it is from this role that the ICC could have suspended Butt. Yet instead of getting their hands dirty, they waited, as they love to do, rather than take the lead as the game’s governing body and take the required action against a guy that cricket does not need.

The ECB had taken their position very early in threatening legal action unless Butt apologised. I get the feeling that any legal battle may have overlapped their beloved up and coming Ashes series as court cases are generally long and drawn out, and England did not want to be dragged into such a distraction. Nevertheless, the allegations were grave and I’m surprised the ECB has settled for a simple apology.

Read the rest of this entry »

11

✩ September 24th, 2010 ✩

BREAKING NEWS – PCB to sue ICC & the Sun

163 Views

The Pakistan Cricket Board has announced that it will be taking legal action against the ICC and the British tabloid paper the Sun after they made public allegations that Pakistan had taken money to fix their scoring pattern in the third ODI at the Oval.

A PCB statement read: “The PCB and the Pakistan players completely reject the allegations made by the Sun newspaper and the ICC yesterday about the Pakistan team’s conduct in the 3rd Nat West ODI at The Brit Insurance Oval.

The allegation’s were wholly irresponsible and completely without foundation.”

“The PCB expresses its gratitude for the outstanding conduct of the Pakistan team since after the first spot fixing story broke and will take all legal and disciplinary action which may result from these allegations.”

“It remains in the best interests of world cricket, the players and in particular of cricket supporters that the tour should continue, and it would set a dangerous precedent to call off a tour based on the misguided and inaccurate allegations of an English tabloid.”

Pakistan’s recently appointed new Chief Executive said: “We are looking for an apology. If it does not come we’ll look at other options. You can’t impugn someone’s integrity without having proper evidence.”

Read the rest of this entry »