But the problem of corruption in cricket lies elsewhere
Legalizing betting in cricket, the standard panacea each time a scandal erupts over match-fixing, and currently spot-fixing, fails to address the central malady of corruption in the game. Instead of suggesting ways to curb the stinking malfeasance, the ‘legalise betting’ lobby dangles the carrot of the ‘share’ in the gambling booty before the Government, as a price for not disturbing their comfort zones. Some of these players are based in Dubai or other offshore havens, beyond the reach of Indian law!
Making gambling easier could prove ruinous to millions of households, as happened in the case of daily lotteries which had to be banned by several state governments. Some State Governments are facing litigation over lottery’s run by them. Also, as pointed out by the Union Sports Ministry after the scandal broke out, betting is a State Subject in India, and cannot be legislated by the Centre.
More pertinently, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is a private body, refusing to become a national sports body on the lines of hockey and other sports, so legalised betting would be difficult to monitor or control when BCCI functions in a patently non-transparent manner. Issues of conflict of interest dog many Board functionaries, and there is increasing national unrest over the presence of politicians in sports bodies, especially cricket.
Indian cricket is in bad odour for refusing to subject itself to the anywhere, anytime, testing norms of the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA). The agency was set up in 1999 to curb the menace of performance-enhancing drugs in international sports, and is backed by the International Olympic Committee. So far, 570 sporting committees in 192 countries have accepted the WADA umbrella. The International Cricket Council (ICC) signed up with WADA in 2006.
Indian cricketers resent the ‘whereabouts’ clause which compels them to declare their movements and be ready to take a random test. It is called an invasion of privacy and a possible breach of their security. But Indian tennis, shooting and other champions have no problem with WADA, and it is generally believed that BCCI’s financial clout is what sustains Indian cricket’s resistance to unscheduled anti-doping tests. Pakistan’s Mohammad Asif and Shoaib Akhtar tested positive before the Champions Trophy in 2006.
Horse racing and other sports have stringent anti-doping norms. In horse-racing, all Olympic and major sports events, the winner undergoes a mandatory urine test before the win is confirmed, to rule out foul play through performance enhancement drugs.
In the match-fixing scandal which shook Indian cricket in 2000, then captain Mohammad Azharuddin was banned for life for accepting money from bookies to throw away matches. Ajay Sharma, Ajay Jadeja and Manoj Prabhakar, and physiotherapist Dr Ali Irani received five year bans. (In 2003, the Delhi High Court revoked Jadeja’s ban and allowed him to play domestic cricket).
Several scandal-tainted international players, notably South Africa captain Hansie Cronje and Pakistan captain Salim Malik, also received life bans. The BCCI came under a cloud as the CBI believed such large-scale fixing and interaction with bookies was not possible without its knowledge. Worse, BCCI refused to investigate when the results of some matches were “patently questionable”.
Now, the current BCCI president N Srinivasan has managed to protect his position despite the latest spot-fixing scandal which first engulfed three key players of the Rajasthan Royals IPL team last month, before tarring his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan and actor Vindoo Dara Singh. The three players reportedly received up to Rs 60 lakh for one over for giving away runs as per arrangements with bookies with underworld connections abroad. Delhi Police investigations showed that three India Premier League matches were manipulated.
In such a scenario, a premier industry body such as the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) calling for legalising betting in the sport within one week of the scandal coming to light is startling. To begin with, it is possible that some of its members might be associated with the ownership of cricket teams and management of cricket bodies (possibly even bookies, or banks used by bookies and betting syndicates).
FICCI in a statement (May 24) said that legal gambling could fetch about Rs 20,000 crore in revenue annually, and that sports betting in India should be regulated. It claimed this would remove ‘black marketing operations in sports betting’. There would be accountability for the large amounts of money transferred through illegal channels, and reduction in cases of match- fixing, money laundering and crimes. FICCI admitted that the young and vulnerable could fall prey to the dangers of unwise betting behaviour.
What is necessary, however, is to avoid knee-jerk reactions and move to make match-fixing and spot fixing illegal on the statute book. It is pertinent that in the Azharuddin affair, no player, bookie or gambler went to jail for the crime. No wonder India is called the “cradle of cricket match-fixing”. Legalizing gambling without plugging this loophole could aggravate the problem. Australia in 2011 prescribed a 10-year maximum jail term for offenders. India must step up to the plate: fix the crime first.
On the flip side, as pointed out by Delhi additional session judge Dharmesh Sharma in September 2010 while trying a case of satta in cricket, legal betting would enable the Government to keep tracks of the funds generated by gambling, their transfer/movement, and inhibit the use of these funds for “clandestine and sinister objectives like drug trafficking and terrorist activities”.
Niticentral.com. 3 June 2013
http://www.niticentral.com/2013/06/03/ipl-scandal-legalising-betting-85169.html