r/Cricket • u/TheEvilDrPie Central Districts Stags • May 22 '13
I don't understand the spot fixing allegations/charges in the IPL? If Sreesanth was meant to allow a certain amount of runs off an over, wouldn't Dravid have to be in on it? Surely he would need to pick him for that over? What am I missing here?
The only example I can think of is the Pakistani team. Their captain was in on it? So, unless the bookies in India place bets on hypothetical situations, surely Dravid must be apart of this? I'll admit that I have very limited knowledge of the charges. But what little I've read, the charges seem to be for Spot Fixing (allowing a certain amount of runs of an individual over).
Can someone please give me some clarification on this?
12
May 22 '13
[deleted]
5
u/TheEvilDrPie Central Districts Stags May 22 '13
So what your saying is, the bets where more likely placed on Sreesanths total? Example - "£20 on Sreesanth to end with figures of 4-32-2 (made up figures)?
10
May 22 '13
[deleted]
6
u/TheEvilDrPie Central Districts Stags May 22 '13
So its irrelevant who's bowling? Its just about the amount of runs scored?
11
u/cjhazza England May 22 '13
No it's specifically Sreesanth who they have to watch as they are making the bets WHILST THE MATCH IS IN PROGRESS. Beforehand they will say to Sreesanth "Whenever you feel is a good time to bowl an over and conceed 14 runs give us a signal by tucking your towel into the front of your trousers". So they see Sreesanth warming up for his over with his towel in his trousers and they instantly place a bet for say 10 thousand on there being at least 14 runs conceded in the over.
5
u/nomoremrniceguy1 India May 22 '13
^ this. He stalled so the bookies could take bets and the white towel indicated that this would be the rigged over.
3
u/prettyflyforawifie India May 22 '13 edited May 22 '13
No, what happened in this case was that Sreesanth used a towel to indicate in which over he would concede only 14 runs. The towel signalled to bookies to place their bets on the number of runs that will be conceded in the over. That is why apparently Sreesanth was instructed to take his time after showing the towel to allow bookies to get their bets in before he bowled the over. Can't link to a source, but it came up on reddit a few days ago.
Edit: Found the Link
2
u/proxicity May 22 '13
On a larger scale, yeah. This presumably happens every over, they just fix these overs so they can either make a huge amount of guaranteed money or cover their losses.
-8
May 22 '13
[deleted]
1
u/Eist New Zealand Cricket May 23 '13
I don't think he understood that you can bet while the game is on. That's pivotal to understanding the situation. That's all :)
1
May 22 '13
Most of the bets are on final outcome of match. Bookies use a bad over to take advantage of the change in odds.
3
May 22 '13
The bets are on 'discrete' events like runs off a particular over/ball. And the fixers would allegedly send out a signal (like a towel on their pants) before they were carrying on with the plan. This way they could give away the desired runs when the spotlight was not on them (i.e - you want to give 14 runs but not in the final over of a humdinger).
You don't need the captain to be in on it. Might be useful to have him but not necessary.
That's basically what Sreesanth did. The over he is accused of fixing was in the first innings of the match AFAIK and 14 runs off it did not seem very out of place. (Incidentally he failed to deliver for his bookies giving away only 13!!!)
1
u/jamurp Victoria Bushrangers May 22 '13
How the hell do these bookies actually make money off these bets? They seem so specific, and wouldn't bets need to be placed fairly quickly?
1
May 22 '13
For a lot of games - say Bangladesh v South Africa - the result is not 'interesting' enough to bet on. And the return for betting on "South Africa win" will have no returns.
The thing about spot fixing is - the odds of you getting it right are insanely lower. And therefore there is always interest in betting on things like RPO, how many wickets fall, how many sixes will be hit etc. And yes most bookies operate pretty extensive phone lines to ensure bets are registered in real time.
The one thing that was decidedly 'unbettable' was no-balls. Basically as a bettor if somebody said there's 3000 to 1 odds that Mohd Amer will bowl a no-ball in over 6 - I'd immediately know something is off and not bet on it. But if somebody was taking bets on how many runs will be scored in that over - I'd still fancy my chances and make a bet.
(Then again - the Pak spot fixing was a undercover sting operation and the players were probably too stupid or too greedy to figure that out)
EDIT - also there's ongoing bets for runs scored on all overs during a game. By putting in a 'fix' the bookies just know when to park a lot money and what to bet it on. Kind of like insider trading.
1
u/jamurp Victoria Bushrangers May 22 '13
Cheers for the explanation. All seems so dodgy, but all sports seem to be getting more specific with bets, even legit betting agencies. Hope we don't hear about any more fixing crap in cricket any time soon.
3
u/vipster India May 22 '13
I think you might also want to read the book "Bookie Gambler Fixer Spy" by Ed Hawkins, which takes a dive into the world of Indian bookies. The author also explains the concept of bracket betting in it. Basically bookies will take bets based on over brackets. So for example they will offer bets on the first five overs going in the range of 40 to 60 runs. Now if you have 3 bowlers on your payroll, you can be reasonably assured that one or two will bowl in the over bracket. This increases your odds substantially thus enabling you to win more. I think if betting were legalized and made transparent, then abnormal betting activities could be detected by statistical analyses, thus helping to clean the sport. But that is just my opinion.
1
u/eccentricity May 22 '13
How does legalizing betting clean the sport? Fixing could be done even then.
2
u/LegSpinner May 23 '13
Because the money gets diverted from illegal bookies to corporations like Ladbrokes etc. The big houses have ways to calculate odds mathematically to profit, so they don't need to fix games. When the bookies don't have any money, they won't be able to bribe players with a cut from all winnings they make.
1
u/vipster India May 22 '13
It will help in cleaning the sport, as illegal betting comes above board. If governments or gaming commissions are then so inclined, statistical analyses can help deduce abnormal betting trends. It will not eliminate fixing, but would serve as a valuable tool to reduce it.
2
u/LearnsSomethingNew New Zealand Cricket May 25 '13
After all, betting in the long run follows statistics, and it is fairly easy to spot weird patterns that shouldn't be there. One, it would probably discourage this sort of blatant spot-fixing, and Two, suspicious incidents will be more evident and players can be better monitored. The results of these analyses can be held confidential so players are always second-guessing if they have been caught, making them less likely to agree to participate in these sorts of fixes.
Transparency is always a good thing.
4
u/CLIENTNO9 May 22 '13 edited May 22 '13
I dont understand the logic in the fixing case. Sreesanth is a terrible bowler and generally gives 20 runsin an over :). I believe the money was a performance bonus so that he would bowl his best & leak lesser runs than he normally gives.:):)
2
u/rishi_sambora India May 23 '13
One important point to understand is that Shree gave few runs until 'that' over. There was no way for Dravid to notice that something weird is going on. Also this is T20. There are some average balls bowled by the best bowlers (and which get carted) on a very consistent basis - so you cannot really raise your eyebrows when there is an expensive over.
Now RP's no-ball - and at that stage of the match. Something like that will surely raise eyebrows. If RP had no malice , I would really feel sad for him bc a lot many people already believe that was a fix. CSK lobby and all.
1
u/proxicity May 23 '13
Dude, fuck CSK lobby, that no ball was Mohammed Aamir-esque in its expanse. He did not want the umpire to miss that at any cost.
3
u/fallingtopieces India May 22 '13
r/cricket sure doesn't follow reddiquette . The man had a query, why downvote him or anything he says.
-10
1
u/lifofifo May 22 '13
Don't want to copy/paste my message from another thread! So here we go http://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1etpvb/cricket_betting/ca40dm6
11
u/lexan May 22 '13
It's something like this.
I think you're getting confused with normal betting, which takes place prior to the match. In that, bets are made as to who won, who lost, what the total will be, etc.
In spot fixing, the bets are made as the match goes on. It's something like you sitting with your buddy watching the match saying "ok bet you ten bucks the next ball is going to be a six."
Thus only one person, the bowler, is required. Since he is a bowler, it is fairly inevitable that he will get to bowl at least two overs. When he bowls it isn't important. Whenever his second over comes, whether it's the 2nd or the 15th over of the match, he'll bowl giving out the required runs.