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.”

“To date I can say that we have received zero evidence of anything having influenced any Pakistan player since the three players were sent home. Clearly we will seek advice but there are quite strong laws of defamation.”

Earlier, an ex-Pakistani captain said: “I’d be making a few phone calls to legal sources to try to take this a little bit further. I can’t think of anything worse than your name mentioned in terms of fixing a game of cricket.”

Pakistan’s current captain Shahid Afridi said: “We would like to express our surprise, dismay and outrage at the comments made by the ICC and the Sun newspaper. We are deeply concerned and disappointed that our integrity as cricketers has been brought into question again”

“We refute these allegations completely and will be working closely with the PCB to explore all legal options open to us.”

“Under the circumstances, we have strong misgivings about continuing to play the last two games of the current series and urge the English team and management to distance themselves from the Newspaper’s allegations.”

“We do, however, recognise our responsibilities to the game of cricket — and in particular to the cricket-loving public in this country — and will therefore endeavour to fulfil these fixtures to the best of our ability.”

Despite the appeals from captain Shahid Afridi, unfortunately it seems that the ECB’s players have failed to distance themselves from the allegations as it was reported that Jonathan Trott, England’s South African star, made fixing remarks to Pakistan’s Pakistani star, Wahab Riaz, which resulted in an ugly altercation in which Trott ended up grabbing Wahab by the throat.

The Newspaper allegations and the ICC’s conduct has also managed to influence the likes of Ian Botham who, despite nothing being proven, has decided to call for Pakistan to be banned from international cricket. Ian Botham has as of yet failed to explain why his stance has changed as he had no such wish after the initial spot fixing allegations during the fourth Test at Lord’s.*

*All quotes are that of either the ECB, Michael Vaughan or England captain Andrew Strauss. The words in bold have been changed simply to demonstrate the holier-than-thou, self-righteousness of the English board, players, pundits and media in feeling hurt when Pakistan had the same accusations flung at them but did not react like the English have.

The difference is England were accused by an idiot in Ijaz Butt, someone who not many people pay attention to, but Pakistan were accused by cricket’s governing body and by an English newspaper; yes, a newspaper from the land of these sanctimonious saints. Shouldn’t Pakistan be the ones upset? Shouldn’t Pakistan be the ones taking legal action? Shouldn’t Pakistan have been the ones calling meetings on whether to continue the tour?

Having received evidence from the newspaper, the ICC have felt it necessary to launch an investigation into allegations that the Pakistan batting innings was scripted, with scoring patterns in two specific overs matching the evidence provided to the ICC before the game. Could something still be going on or could the said scoring patterns have been just a coincidence?

The fact that the ICC felt it necessary to launch an investigation will point to them having some substantial evidence to do so. But there are a number of reasons why these recent ongoings may just be a coincidence.

With the spotlight of the world on the Pakistan side, would anyone in the team have been brave or foolish enough to take instructions from bookies? I would be very surprised if this was the case. Secondly, Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir who had been implicated previously are no longer in the side. Salman Butt was even referred to as the ringleader, so with the aforementioned not being there would something untoward still be going on? Also, with the police on Mazhar Majeed’s tail, it would be highly unlikely that he would still have contact with any of the players let alone be setting up fixes. It’s certain any other agent looking from the outside wouldn’t have dared try anything now too.

Which batsmen could have been involved?
If you look at the Pakistani line up, the only player there to have been linked with the original scandal was Kamran Akmal. Yet just looking at his innings on the day would tell you that Akmal wasn’t in long enough to carry out any instructions and neither would his freak dismissal (the ball deflected off the underside of his thigh pad, behind his leg and onto the stumps) have been something purposely planned out.

It is yet to be revealed the two overs in which the alleged fixed scoring pattern took place or who was at the crease at the time. We’ve already seen why it probably wasn’t Kamran Akmal so if it is true who could it have been?

Mohammad Hafeez, along with Akmal fell in the first three overs and both made 1 and 5 respectively so it’s unlikely it could have been them. The next batting partnership was between Asad Shafiq who has just got into the side and Mohammad Yousuf, a deeply religious guy, who himself has recently returned having been sidelined because of infighting. Neither of them would seem likely to do anything sinister. After Yousuf’s dismissal, we had the Shafiq and Fawad Alam partnership. Fawad is another battling to secure his place and his innings was no different to his usual. Then there was Umar Akmal, Shahid Afridi and Abdul Razzaq, all them would have came in at points in the innings where the total at that oint in time would have been not something they could have controlled. Akmal would have been less likely to do something due to the suspicion surrounding his brother and Razzaq and Afridi played the types of innings you would usually associate with them. Also, being the captain of a side that is under the microscope with all that has gone on, Afridi would be even less likely to get involved with something. I think his response to the recent allegations “All this is rubbish”, said it all. He is frustrated as any Pakistan fan that new allegations have been thrown at the team in the attempt to kick them whilst they’re down.

Individual batsmen aside, I think the rate at which the wickets fell and the mode of many of the dismissals means that scripting a specific target over two overs would have been very difficult to achieve unless more than at least three players were involved. Considering all the evidence, I’d be surprised if there was any truth in the Sun’s allegations but you just never know.

ICC – Inept and crass as the PCB
The ICC was very quick to reveal to the media that they had begun investigations on what are just allegations without considering the potential consequences on Pakistan cricket. Indeed, they did not even inform the Pakistan Cricket Board that they were about to do so. It seems the spot fixing scandals have woken the ICC up from their slumber and highlighted the ineffectiveness of their Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU). Now the world is watching, the ditherers at the ICC feel they have to be seen and heard to be doing something, whatever that may be. They could have prevented the trial by media the Pakistan team has been and will be subjected to but instead they took the main role. In general, the ICC’s actions seem very much like those of an organisation that is always chasing the the crime rather than preventing it from happening.

Crude Flower and classy Strauss
Andy Flower has opened his mouth again and you would have to wonder if he thinks before he speaks. He felt it necessary to give his view on the Sun’s allegations saying “From a selfish perspective it’s really annoying because it devalues our Test series and it’s also devaluing this one-day series”. With two ODIs left to go, the ECB can’t have been too happy with Flowers comments as they battle to fill the seats in the grounds. Flowers comments are in direct contrast to that of England captain Andrew Strauss who, when questioned, made it clear that credibility in the allegations had still to be substantiated saying “we don’t know how credible the evidence is” and “[The ODIs have] been three very hard-fought cricket matches. There certainly seems to be passion on both sides, they’ve been high intensity affairs”. He went on: “The only thing you can say is give the benefit of the doubt that these allegations are well off the mark. That is certainly my attitude at the moment – because I would be dumbfounded if it was taking place after everything that has gone on in the Test series.” Flower could learn a thing or two from his captain. Maybe Andy is feeling the pressure and trying to deflect the attention after England not performing as well in the ODIs as they had hoped especially with the World Cup around the corner.

Ijaz Butt loses the plot
So as to be not outdone by the ineptitude of the ICC, PCB chairman Ijaz Butt has responded with some remarkable claims of his own. He alleges that English players were involved in match fixing in the third ODI saying “There is loud and clear talk in bookie circles that some English players have taken enormous amounts of money to lose the match [the third ODI]. No wonder there was such a collapse”. He also claimed that there was a “conspiracy to defraud Pakistan cricket” by various people and groups.I hope for the sake of Pakistan cricket that he has some real evidence because it’s not as if certain players haven’t brought enough embarrassment on this nation and it’s cricket. Should Butt’s claims fail to stand up, we may well see Pakistan losing it’s member status in international cricket.

Truth in the allegations against Pakistan or not, I think the newspaper certainly got their required response with the ICC jumping the gun, the ECB holding meetings in regards to the tour, England’s coach Andy Flower saying the series has become devalued, South Africa already feeling the need to speak out on whether the games against them will go ahead in the UAE, and pundits everywhere questioning the future of Pakistan Cricket. Allegations or not, the reaction from various corners has been quite pathetic, sad, irresponsible and inconsiderate.

England had no answer to Gul's reverse swing

A quite brilliant spell of swing bowling from Umar Gul clinched Pakistan the third ODI against England at the Oval. Gul finished with figures of 6-42 which included three bowled dismissals. Through certain parts of the Test series and the previous two ODIs, Gul has looked a shadow of the man who holds the accolade of being the best bowler in Twenty cricket – the form of cricket which is harshest on bowlers. Gul does seem to be one of those bowlers that needs to be near optimum fitness in order to perform at his best. A few niggles whilst he has been over here in England may lay claim to why he hadn’t shown the type of bowling he showed today.

At most points throughout the England innings it seemed as a forgone conclusion that England would knock off the runs and go into a 3-0 unassailable lead. Indeed, Billy Doctrove who saved Andrew Strauss and England in the last game tried his best to do so again today when he for some reason did not refer a stumping appeal to the third umpire. Luke Wright was the batsman and Umar Akmal, deputising for his injured brother behind the stumps, did very well to time the stumping just as Wright’s foot was off the ground. Rather than go up to the thrid umpire and make sure, Doctrove immediately said no as Akmal appealed.

Earlier in Pakistan’s innings, there was a far less convincing appeal by England, and one that would be far less in line with the spirit of the game, when Shahid Afridi took evasive action to a throw which struck his bat and went onto the stumps. Docrtrove walked over to the stumps to replace the bails and seemed as if he wasn’t going to even consider it as a run out until Stewart Broad queried it. After taking a few seconds to think about it, Doctrove went upstairs for the decision and Afridi was given out. The difference between the two events was a clear case of double standards that could probably only be explained by some sort of inferiority complex displayed by umpire Doctrove.

In regards to Doctrove not going upstairs for Wright’s stumping; getting a marginal decision wrong is one thing, but when you have the third umpire as a back up and you don’t use him, it’s criminal. I hope Pakistan raise the issue and Doctrove is reprimanded as this kind of thing cannot happen again at the top level of the game. He has already cost Pakistan the previous ODI, and he almost cost us another one. Of course, this is the same Billy Doctrove who stood back quietly as umpire Darrell Hair decided to act as judge jury and executioner in the infamous Oval Test in 2006.

So onto the fourth game in the series on Monday with Pakistan unfortunate to be trailing 2-1. Should the Stanis take the next one, it will leave an exciting decider at the Rose Bowl on Wednesday.

Andrew Strauss sullies the game but it's acceptable

Cricket has always seemed to take the moral high-ground when it comes to sports related problems such racism and hooliganism we see in football, or the continued battle athletics has with drugs use. But there is no other sport where cheating is so blatantly accepted as just a part of the game. We saw the hue and cry over the recent spot fixing allegations against the Pakistan player where law makers, supporters and players of various nations acting as if they had been truly hurt, but where are these voices when something like this happens? I deplore match-fixing, let me make that clear, but I deplore this form of cheating too. Whilst people may argue there is no comparison between the no-balls Amir and Asif bowled, I will simply ask them which act influenced the result of the game? Was it those no-balls or Strauss’ failure to walk when he was on 38 and went on to make a match winning 126. Who is the bigger cheat?

I rate Andrew Strauss; he is an excellent batsman and a good captain. What I admire about him most though is the intelligent and thoughtful manner in which he speaks even when ungracious coach Andy Flower does the opposite. Unfortunately, when Strauss doesn’t walk he badly lets himself down. Now this is not the first time Strauss has been involved with something like this. In the Test series that has just finished, Strauss stood his ground on two separate occasions after Pakistan’s appeals had been declined by the umpire but then reviewed on request. Now Strauss knew he was out, he knew the review would show he was out, but he still stood his ground. Even if I had edged behind for example and been given not out but had still stayed at the crease, once the bowling team had asked for a review I would walk even before the third umpire’s decision because it would be embarrassing not to do so. Strauss unfortunately did not, on two separate occasions. A man’s character, his reputation, is far more important than what he achieves in a game Andrew. Of course, Strauss is not the only one in cricket who is guilty of this, but when such a nice gentleman can repeatedly do it without obvious regret, it gives you an idea of how acceptable it is in the game.

Not only is this cheating not discouraged in cricket, it is well rewarded and and thus, encouraged. Strauss was presented with the man of the match award for his match winning century, a century he had no shame in celebrating when he brought it up in the 34th over of the game, even though he was out much earlier. Had I cheated my way to a milestone, I wouldn’t have celebrated as Strauss did, but of course, I wouldn’t have been there in the first place as I would have walked off when I was out.

But maybe that is just a reflection of the way of the world. If you do bad, cheat, take short cuts and are selfish, you get rewarded, but if you’re a good doer you get shunned and sidelined, like Rashid Latif for example who has recently been forced to resign after he revealed how Pakistan’s cricketers meddled in match-fixing in the past.

So while the law makers, players and supporters of different nations put up this act of being appalled by the recent spot-fixing allegations, let them remember their contribution too, to the cheating that goes on in this game. Neither are you or your game that innocent after all. In his book What Price the Moral High Ground, author Robert Frank challenges the notion that success is achieved only at the expense of doing good, and cricket, the gentleman’s game, can do far worse than to challenge this notion too and get rid of this accepted disease that pervades the game.

We did mention in a previous post that Yousuf’s return will not only have the obvious effect of adding runs to the scoreboard, but also have an influence on the opposition and the young Pakistan batting line up. Certainly, it was obvious from Azhar Ali’s body language, that he was delighted to be out there in the middle with Mohammed Yousuf, and it is no coincidence that it led to Azhar’s highest score of his young Test career.

Did someone call for Yousuf? Mohammed Yousuf's return coincided with Pakistan's first 300 plus total of the tour of England

Yousuf’s affect on the mindset of the opposition was obvious, with Strauss adopting defensive fields to him very early on  as it became clear that the tactics employed previously to the other Pakistani batsmen, were not going to work with Yousuf. Just his name on the team sheet would have put doubts in the minds of the English bowlers, as Swann later touched upon in an interview, that he had looked down the Pakistan line up and identified Yousuf as the prize wicket for his 100th Test victim. As it turned out, Swann did manage to get him, but more through a lapse in the great man’s judgement to a negative Ashley Giles type of round the wicket line from Swann, than through the guile of the bowler himself.

Many Younis Khan supporters suggest that Younis should also be brought back as he would have a similar affect, but just watching Yousuf play, it’s obvious that even from where Younis is, Yousuf is still a level or two above. Yousuf has not gained much support from the Pakistani contingent of writers on cricinfo, and it is sad that this kind of mentality still exists even amongst our fans. Most of this lack of support was due to their constant backing, which was sometimes blind, of Younis Khan. They’re sure to be eating a bit of humble pie after yesterday. Even those less affiliated with Pakistan cricket, like Andrew Miller on cricinfo, can appreciate what Mohammed Yousuf is, so it is a shame that some of ‘Pakistan’s own’  could not bring themselves to do so:

“But unlike his less experienced team-mates, who had clung on without pushing on at Edgbaston, Yousuf used every ball faced to gauge the pace of the wicket. By the time he reached a half-century for the 57th time in 89 Tests, he was right back at the top of his game, with Steven Finn leaking four fours in ten balls to the first true great he’s ever encountered.” Cricinfo’s Andrew Miller

It is obvious that Pakistan still need Mohammed Yousuf and not even Osman Samiuddin and Kamran Abbasi could deny that…well they could, but they shouldn’t. At 35 years of age, I hope Yousuf has a few more years left in him yet. A freak of nature, how he can be so uncoordinated in the field and so graceful and majestic with a bat in his hand, I don’t know. If there is a more absorbing batsman to watch in world cricket, I am yet to come across him.

Captains take a bite. Maybe there was something wrong with the Australian food?

Afridi was being touted for captain in the Test and ODI formats and I would not have minded. He made a good case with his recent performances and showed signs of maturity but his actions here have got me wondering if he really has matured. Yes, every team probably does it Shahid, but I doubt they use their teeth and make it so blatantly obvious. He may as well have gone up to umpire Asoka De Silva and asked to use his dentures. And when quizzed on Pakistani television, why on earth did he come out with the excuse that he was smelling the ball? He would have even been better off saying that he was starving because of the poor Australian cuisine.

Afridi has history of course. In a game against England, he walked onto the middle of the pitch and preceded to do a few pirouettes to scuff up the track with his spikes. Highly subtle once again. Yet maybe he should have used his spikes on the ball this time by stepping on it as it obviously legal as it worked for Stuart Broad in the recent match against South Africa where he got away with it.

Stuart Broad, sinking his spikes into the ball & doing "nothing wrong"

And the difference between what Broad and Afridi did? Nothing. So why did he get away with it? Well it’s obvious, Broad is an Englishman. Broad knew what he was doing and as soon as the allegations emerged, the English PR machine went into overdrive with Broad being “astonished” by the allegations, Strauss calling them “malicious” and Cook being angry since they’d done “nothing wrong”. At the time, Nasser Hussain, Michael Vaughan and Simon Wilde of The Sunday Times had suggested that the outcome would have been far different if the bowler who did it was from Pakistan. It is clear this difference they spoke of is being shown to some extent in how Afridi’s actions were dealt with. If you look at the effect it has on the ball, surely metal spikes are worse than the enamel that teeth are made of? But I guess in the eyes of the ICC, a Pakistani is worse than an Englishman too.

What Afridi did was wrong and embarrassing, but that and what Broad did shows why it continues to pay to be from certain countries. Just ask Sulieman Benn who was suspended after an incident with Mitchell Johnson and the saint that is Brad Haddin. Haddin, who instigated the clash, and Johnson who clearly makes physical contact with Benn first (at 3 minutes 55 secs), were only fined a fraction of their match fees, whereas Benn was banned, after the match referee had finished analysing his findings. That match referee was Broad’s daddy Chris, by the way. If you don’t want to call it racism, then call it whatever you will, but what it is, is obvious.

Andrew Strauss said that English counties were being short sighted and national selector Geoff Miller said he was “disappointed” at the developments. Yet their responses could have been much more positive. They should have said that it doesn’t matter and that it also gives us (England) a chance to have a closer look at their players. It can work both ways.

And surprise surprise, the Aussies have picked up on the negativeness with Phil Hughes going back home and giving interviews (with a cheeky grin) which would have made Strauss and Miller pull their hair out about how he “thoroughly enjoyed” his time and with the grounds he played at “It couldn’t have really worked out any better”. He’s still 20 and he’s got the English panicking like dithering fools already.

The Ashes are still a while off. Stuart Clark and Phil Hughes may play in County cricket but they will have to get used to it all over again by the time the Ashes comes around.

Whether or not the counties should have allowed this is another question. It’s England’s manner of response to the fact the counties did that is the real worry.