Wasn't in right frame of mind in '99 tour of Australia: Sachin

[satyam1729]

DURBAN: Sachin Tendulkar has for the first time admitted that the match-fixing episodes in 1999-2000 had initially affected his game and the Indian team had to go through a difficult and painful phase as "spectators looked at us with suspicion". Tendulkar said he was not in the right frame of mind during India's disastrous tour of Australia where they were thrashed 0-3 in 1999-2000. "I can tell you that I was never approached by anyone, neither we had any discussions about the same in the team meeting," Tendulkar told former South African Board President Dr Ali Bacher in an interview for Super Sport Channel. "I remember that there was stage in 1999-2000 when it was very difficult as we were to play Australia. Before the series these things started making rounds. As a cricketer that's the last thing I want. "You want your beloved game to be as clean as possible. I wanted the spectators to enjoy the contest and not look at us with suspicion. To play well, players need to be in right frame of mind and I can tell you that I was not in that frame of mind," Tendulkar said, recollecting the disastrous series. The pain in his voice was evident as he gave the interview. "Every match you play and people pass on loose comments. This was really hurting me and the whole team," said the maestro. Tendulkar felt that their historic 2-1 series win over Australia at home was the turning point. "I was sure that we needed to put up a very special performance against Aussies so that cricket lovers forget what has happened in the past and start enjoying the game again and move on. With grace of God we managed to do that. "We lost the first match at Mumbai. But in the next match at Kolkata we fought back from very bad position and won that match to level the series. Last match was even harder. At Chennai while chasing small total we lost 8 wickets but won that Test match and series too. "I was happy for the fact we forced cricket lovers to forget about that bad chapter and start following cricket again." Recollecting the horror days of match fixing, Bacher revealed that the South African Board was indeed approached by bookmakers. "We were directly approached by bookmakers to take their offer to the players through team meeting. Those were days when in couple of ICC meetings, I had raised this issue. The issue was not properly discussed and I was told to get evidence and proof," said Bacher. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/Wasnt-in-right-frame-of-mind-in-99-tour-of-Australia-Sachin/articleshow/7253894.cms#ixzz1AdhwCOmM

[vvvslaxman]

I call that "Debang Gandhi" tour :cantstop: One of the worst to represent India. From a personal point of view Sachin won man of the series.

[Sooda]

^ Aye one of the worst touring sides ever I think from INdia..the side contained Gandhi, MSK Prasad, Kanitkar, Bharadwaj, Sir Aggy and got roundly smashed unsurprsingly. Only bright spot was as you say Sachin and VVSLs super 167 at Sydney

[coffee_rules]

Agree that's one of the worst teams. The 1996 tour of Eng when India lost to a very bad team was the worst for me.

[jaggadaku]

^^ Those were the horror days, and you forgot to mention legendary Jacob Martin. It didn't help matters that SRT got 3 or 4 howlers

[Bublu Bhuyan]

^ Those were the horror days' date=' and you forgot to mention legendary Jacob Martin. It didn't help matters that [b']SRT got 3 or 4 howlers

From what I remember: 1st howler was when he was adjudged caught off Shane Warne on 69 odd when replays showed that the ball came off the pad. 2nd howler (debatable) was when he was adjudged Shoulder before Wicket to McGrath on 0. But it's debatable. There has been various comments from various ex-cricketers who said that although unfortunate, as per the rules of the game the umpire had no option but to rule the batsman out. 3rd howler (debatable) was when he was adjudged LBW to McGrath on 45 when replays showed that the ball struck SRT too high on the pads. I don't remember any 4th howler.

[apeeman]

anyone has the video of the interview?

[Sachin_Rulez]

HUH? Didn't match fixing episode come to the light in 2000 after we completed the Aus tour and SA home series.

[Raghav_12]

From what I remember: 1st howler was when he was adjudged caught off Shane Warne on 69 odd when replays showed that the ball came off the pad. 2nd howler (debatable) was when he was adjudged Shoulder before Wicket to McGrath on 0. But it's debatable. There has been various comments from various ex-cricketers who said that although unfortunate, as per the rules of the game the umpire had no option but to rule the batsman out. 3rd howler (debatable) was when he was adjudged LBW to McGrath on 45 when replays showed that the ball struck SRT too high on the pads. I don't remember any 4th howler.

Huh.. how come third one was debatable? It was too high and had hit him above knee and as per Cricinfo commentory it was definitely a bad decision. 2nd was also a bad decision and Sachin was unfortunate to be given out like that. Over all 3 bad decisions in 6 innings is bad enough. Don't you think so?

[Ram]

First of all, Sachin’s claim that he was never approached by any book-makers is as hard to believe as the fake drama you see on reality tv. He was/is the Number ONE performer in the team. If anything, the bookmakers would have targeted him in FIRST, before moving on to the smaller fry. He’s obviously lying, as does any cricketer who says he hasn’t been approached. Because once you concede openly that you HAVE been approached, then it opens itself to a whole gamut controversies as to why you didn’t report it to anyone at that time plus the obvious issue putting the lives of youself and and your family at risk. I am more interested in what Sachin, or the other players with integrity on the team did, when they realized that something was fishy within the team. Except for the few odd occasions, Its close to impossible to miss when some members of your team are involved in match-fixing. What did these honest guys do? Did they just think to themselves ‘Well, I know these things are going on, but I really cannot afford to put myself and my family at risk by being the whistleblower..’ or did they try to do anything about it at all, like maybe sending BCCI/Authorities anynymous mails maybe, trying to tip them off. The whole match-fixing saga was without a shadow of doubt, the darkest hour of Indian cricket and it’s a great shame that 10 years after the scandal broke, we still don’t know what exactly happened.

[apeeman]

First of all, Sachin’s claim that he was never approached by any book-makers is as hard to believe as the fake drama you see on reality tv. He was/is the Number ONE performer in the team. If anything, the bookmakers would have targeted him in FIRST, before moving on to the smaller fry. He’s obviously lying, as does any cricketer who says he hasn’t been approached. Because once you concede openly that you HAVE been approached, then it opens itself to a whole gamut controversies as to why you didn’t report it to anyone at that time plus the obvious issue putting the lives of youself and and your family at risk. I am more interested in what Sachin, or the other players with integrity on the team did, when they realized that something was fishy within the team. Except for the few odd occasions, Its close to impossible to miss when some members of your team are involved in match-fixing. What did these honest guys do? Did they just think to themselves ‘Well, I know these things are going on, but I really cannot afford to put myself and my family at risk by being the whistleblower..’ or did they try to do anything about it at all, like maybe sending BCCI/Authorities anynymous mails maybe, trying to tip them off. The whole match-fixing saga was without a shadow of doubt, the darkest hour of Indian cricket and it’s a great shame that 10 years after the scandal broke, we still don’t know what exactly happened.

I disagree. A bookie could get a sense of the player in other occasions..(lunches, parties, other players etc...) ,maybe bring about topic of match fixing in a jovial manner and see how ppl react...judge if they are silent, vehemently approached,reputation of the player etc.. in a nut shell, do a character study.... So, there is a good chance that he was never approached. After all, one man cannot make the team. Again, you look at family risks in being a whistle-blower. There is of course team spirit and team management. These are guys you have been with day in and day out for years to gether. You have shared so many joyous occasions and emotions play a part. I would assume at the least they would have let team management know. As you said, its impossible to prove fixing and hence suspicions are just restricted to locker room conversations and informal protests with the team management.... I am not sure we'll ever know what actually happened. We can get accounts and sachin's account doesnt clear anything. We need someone to do investigative journalism and corroborate responses from multiple parties. Care to try?:two_thumbs_up:

[Ram]

I disagree. A bookie could get a sense of the player in other occasions..(lunches' date=' parties, other players etc...) ,maybe bring about topic of match fixing in a jovial manner and see how ppl react...judge if they are silent, vehemently approached,reputation of the player etc.. in a nut shell, do a character study.... So, there is a good chance that he was never approached. After all, one man cannot make the team. [/quote'] Dude, who do you think these book-makers are? You friendly neighborhood retired English professors? They’re some pretty badass people – Drug dealers, smugglers, underworld guys.. They wont be sending friendly feelers to players to see who responds and who doesn’t. And look at it from a bookie perspective. If you’re trying fix the result of a game , who would you approach first? Would it be the fringe player who has litte or no chance of even featuring in the team, or the undisputed match-winner of the team? To me, the answer is a no-brainer.

Again, you look at family risks in being a whistle-blower. There is of course team spirit and team management. These are guys you have been with day in and day out for years to gether. You have shared so many joyous occasions and emotions play a part. I would assume at the least they would have let team management know. As you said, its impossible to prove fixing and hence suspicions are just restricted to locker room conversations and informal protests with the team management....

Sure, what you say could have happened, who knows. But I am just not willing to buy the line that Sachin and the other honest guys in the team did not know anything that was happening or were never approached by anyone. I am pretty sure everyone was approached, and everyone in the team knew what was going on. What they chose to do with that information, is what I am more interested in.

I am not sure we'll ever know what actually happened. We can get accounts and sachin's account doesnt clear anything. We need someone to do investigative journalism and corroborate responses from multiple parties. Care to try?:two_thumbs_up:

Oh sure. I am all for this daring initiative. If only I had someone to work with.. You available? :two_thumbs_up:

[The Outsider]

Dude, who do you think these book-makers are? You friendly neighborhood retired English professors? They’re some pretty badass people – Drug dealers, smugglers, underworld guys.. They wont be sending friendly feelers to players to see who responds and who doesn’t. And look at it from a bookie perspective. If you’re trying fix the result of a game , who would you approach first? Would it be the fringe player who has litte or no chance of even featuring in the team, or the undisputed match-winner of the team? To me, the answer is a no-brainer.

LOL! So, if you wanted to get an examination paper leaked you would approach the chief secretary of the education board? No, you will try to ascertain from conversations and other links who is most likely to be corrupted in the entire set up and chain. Bookies might not be English professors but they are certainly not dumb to just randomly broach up fixing matches to each and every player. In fact, the Waugh-Warne story is a good example of how things would have happened in practice. Develop some personal relationships, ask for some seemingly harmless information at first, see how it goes, and then graduate to developing the relation further and asking them to do small and then bigger things on the cricket field for money. This is how Cronje described his dealings with the bookies as well, not like one fine day some bookie met him in a bar and asked him to get out for less than 5 for $50,000.

[Rajiv]

Bookies don't approach players, by asking them autographs or running behind them LOL. They need 1 contact in the team or an ex-player to move around inside depending on how close they are to the rest. It's always 1 Bookie ( D Company ) with branches, as odds are relayed to different city centers. I don't think any bookie would have "approached" sachin who would probably get him arrested

[Ram]

LOL! So, if you wanted to get an examination paper leaked you would approach the chief secretary of the education board? No, you will try to ascertain from conversations and other links who is most likely to be corrupted in the entire set up and chain. Bookies might not be English professors but they are certainly not dumb to just randomly broach up fixing matches to each and every player. In fact, the Waugh-Warne story is a good example of how things would have happened in practice. Develop some personal relationships, ask for some seemingly harmless information at first, see how it goes, and then graduate to developing the relation further and asking them to do small and then bigger things on the cricket field for money. This is how Cronje described his dealings with the bookies as well, not like one fine day some bookie met him in a bar and asked him to get out for less than 5 for $50,000.

Even if we go by your assertion that the bookies are way more sophisticated than I give them credit for, that still doesn’t change anything. I still don’t believe any frontline Indian player in the 90s, whether it be Sachin or anyone else, when they say they have never been approached. The obvious implication of that statement is ‘I didn’t know anything that was happening. I was never approached by anyone. So don’t ask me questions.’. To me, that is a laughable thing to say. At some point or the other, if you’re a frontine cricketer, you HAVE to have been approached. A news report some time ago estimated that every time India played match, illegal bets worth 100 of crores were placed. With that kind ofmoney at stake, there’s no way you could have ever escaped the bookie radar, especially if you’re a front-line player like Sachin.

[The Outsider]

^ Don't think you have read the CBI report in detail. According to the report, as Rajiv alluded above, all major contact initiations were through Ajay Sharma and Manoj Prabhakar. Ajay Sharma and Prabhakar were their contact points with the team and it was only after a few years that they started dealing directly with Azhar and Jadeja. It was Ajay Sharma and Prabhakar at first and Azhar and Jadeja later on who were doing the part of interacting with the players involved in fixing. Dean Jones, Malik, Stewart, Waugh were all introduced through Prabhakar. The team members and fellow cricketers would obviously test the waters before introducing these cricketers to the bookies. It is very possible and highly likely that the initial subtle broach to Tendulkar or some others was cold shouldered so brusquely that it was deemed to be a futile lead.

[Ram]

^ Don't think you have read the CBI report in detail. According to the report, as Rajiv alluded above, all major contact initiations were through Ajay Sharma and Manoj Prabhakar. Ajay Sharma and Prabhakar were their contact points with the team and it was only after a few years that they started dealing directly with Azhar and Jadeja. It was Ajay Sharma and Prabhakar at first and Azhar and Jadeja later on who were doing the part of interacting with the players involved in fixing. Dean Jones, Malik, Stewart, Waugh were all introduced through Prabhakar. The team members and fellow cricketers would obviously test the waters before introducing these cricketers to the bookies. It is very possible and highly likely that the initial subtle broach to Tendulkar or some others was cold shouldered so brusquely that it was deemed to be a futile lead.

Sure, could very well be the case. But you’re missing the central point I have been trying to make all the while – It is very very hard to belive ANY frontline player in the 90s, who says he was never approached. I think pretty much everyone was. Whether it was directly done by the bookies, or through proxies in the team, I don’t really care. And once read between the lines; When a player says ‘I was never approached..’, the obvious implication is that he is completely washing his hands off all those events by feigning sheer ignorance. That is again, very hard to believe, especially since Sachin was the captain during that time.

[The Outsider]

^ How would the player be even certain that the approach from some player was for a bookie if it was kept subtle enough. Just making up stuff here, but if Jadeja told Tendulkar casually, 'Damn! You won't believe it. I met this guy at a party willing to give me his Rolex just for telling him if we would bat or bowl after winning the toss! What kind of a fool would do that when everyone in the world knows this is a bat first pitch'. An abrupt close of the subject would mean Tendulkar is off limits and yet Tendulkar has no idea that some approach was made by a fellow player. If on the other hand he shows some interest things would move forward. In none of the player or bookie testimonies was it mentioned that Tendulkar was introduced to some bookie. There were 10s of players mentioned who were introduced at some point or the other (not all might have fixed matches of course) - why was his and quite a few other players' names like Kumble, Srinath consistently absent?

[apeeman]

Dude, who do you think these book-makers are? You friendly neighborhood retired English professors? They’re some pretty badass people – Drug dealers, smugglers, underworld guys.. They wont be sending friendly feelers to players to see who responds and who doesn’t. And look at it from a bookie perspective. If you’re trying fix the result of a game , who would you approach first? Would it be the fringe player who has litte or no chance of even featuring in the team, or the undisputed match-winner of the team? To me, the answer is a no-brainer. While i dont expect english professors, i cannot help but feel you are throwing an image of an 80s bad ass villian who has a skimpily clad lady dancing around while he invites the hero for a glass of whisky and tries to bribe/blackmail the hero to do his bidding...come on, you would think these guys know who is easy and who isn't. I guess Azhar.M and Jadeja,A gave them more than enough fodder. Sure, what you say could have happened, who knows. But I am just not willing to buy the line that Sachin and the other honest guys in the team did not know anything that was happening or were never approached by anyone. I am pretty sure everyone was approached, and everyone in the team knew what was going on. What they chose to do with that information, is what I am more interested in. I think there are two distinct statements here. a. did sachin and others think something was happening b. were they approached for A, i think the answer should be yes. I am sure they had their suspicions and people were conjuring things after prabakar's comments. for B, though, there is a chance that the answer could be no. Its open to interpretation. Would you call talking about match fixing and asking a question like "why would someone do that?" be construed as approaching. I guess u can qualify the conversation to be one asking the player to fix matches only if " the player is actually asked about it." This is very subjective in my opinion. Oh sure. I am all for this daring initiative. If only I had someone to work with.. You available? :two_thumbs_up:

Y dont you go in and discuss while i wait outside :hysterical::hysterical:

[apeeman]

damn...still need to learn multiquoting...please read between the lines