ok…so match fixing has been in full swing for at least 20 years…so many players were caught red handed…blah blah blah..ICC tried its best but this monster kept on coming back…but isn’t this surprising that not even a single umpire ever got involved in this fiasco…
they make so much less than players and among all stakeholdesr (bowlers, batsmen, keeper, umpires), it is easiest for them to change the whole complexion of game by one or two close decisions…they cant do spot fixing but for match fixing, why do you need 10 players to buy…just buy one umpire…
yes it has become difficult nowadays for umpires to fix a game as they have to refer all close run outs to tv camera and players can go upstairs for 2 chances but there is still a lot of room for them…and more perplexing is the fact that back in 90s when match fixing was at peak, umpires were in complete control of the game…yet not a single incidence…
now I am not saying why are umpires not involved…thx god they are not..but i just found it odd…if I am a match fixer, why wud I spend millions to buy 3 players with so much risk..plus it is so hard for players to deliver by playing bad…yes bowling poorly is not that easy…so how abt paying one third of it and buy an umpire…and he can easily give one or 2 close decisions in favor of bookie’s team…
so these bookies who are so hell bent on doing anything to buy players despite so much scrutiny, how come they never tried buying any umpire…seems odd… or maybe they did but ICC had a proper mitigation system…may be that is why ICC came up with the elite panel concept…