Suddenly, the glorious cricket of last summer seems a distant memory. Revelations about the alleged involvement of New Zealanders in match-fixing have cast the darkest of shadows over the game in this country. We now know there was, indeed, substance to claims made several years ago, but strongly denied by New Zealand Cricket at the time. As disappointing as this is, it should come as no surprise. It was naive to imagine that cricketers from this country would somehow be immune to the financial temptations that have led to players from five nations being banned from the game for various periods for dealing with bookmakers.
Confirmation of the worst was delivered in a British newspaper article that suggested former Black Cap Lou Vincent was seeking a plea bargain for full disclosure of his involvement in spot- and match-fixing. This was said to have spread across Asia, South Africa and England. Also leaked has been testimony from Vincent's former wife and the current national captain, Brendon McCullum, who said he had been offered up to $200,000 a match to fix games. The approach had been made by a cricketing "hero", dubbed Player X. The Herald has revealed that this is Chris Cairns, the former New Zealand all-rounder. He has always denied involvement in match-fixing.
Perhaps the only bright spot in all this is the conduct of McCullum in rebuffing the approach. The International Cricket Council said yesterday that he had "acted quite properly in accordance with his responsibilities as a professional cricketer". Nothing else, however, bodes well for the standing of this country's cricketers or the fight against cheating. A key to the latter is the fate of the ICC's Anti-Corruption and Security Unit, which, with London's Metropolitan Police, is conducting the present inquiry.
We know some of what has been going on only because of the leaking of testimonies to that unit. In itself, that is unsatisfactory, and has led to justifiable claims that it will dissuade players from reporting match-fixing approaches. But the current state of affairs must be viewed in the context of the attempt by India, aided by England and Australia, to take greater control of world cricket. A part of this is their investigation into the effectiveness of the anti-corruption unit.
At the moment, it is independent, a state that allows it to pursue alleged match-fixers without political interference. The likelihood, however, is that the Big Three will return such investigations to the national governing bodies, some of which will be less than whole-hearted in their endeavours.
