All posts by h716a5.icu

Luke Shaw has been labelled the "most unreliable player to ever wear a Manchester United shirt" after leaving the pitch before half-time at Luton.

Article continues below

Article continues below

Article continues below

Shaw injured at Aston VillaReturned in time to start Luton gameWent down tunnel before half-time whistleWHAT HAPPENED?

Shaw went off at half-time as a "precaution" during United's 2-1 win at Aston Villa last week, but recovered in time to return to Erik ten Hag's starting XI at Kenilworth Road on Sunday. However, the England full-back tweaked something with seconds to go until the interval, and signalled to the bench before making his way down the tunnel, with Victor Lindelof brought on as his replacement in defence.

AdvertisementGettyWHAT THE FANS ARE SAYING

Fans took to social media after the incident to criticise Shaw, who also missed the majority of the first half of the season due to injury. One account named @zeeshankxz wrote: "Luke Shaw subbed off. The most unreliable player to ever wear a Manchester United shirt. Protected by the fans like he is something special. The sooner we move on the better."

Another account, called @TenHagEra, said: "Love him as a footballer and a person, but we might have to buy a Luke Shaw replacement with all these reoccurring injuries.."

With the 28-year-old's latest injury having yet to be specified, fan account @BillyMeredithMU simply asked: "What's wrong with Luke Shaw?"

The same account then added in a separate post: "Left Back needs to be a priority next season. Luke Shaw isn’t reliable at all."

Meanwhile, @UtdXclusive asked: "If Luke Shaw wasn't 100% fit why risk making the injury worse?"

WHAT TEN HAG SAID

United went on to win the game 2-1 without Shaw, and Erik ten Hag confirmed after the final whistle that it wasn't just a "knock" that forced the left-back off. The Dutch coach added to BBC Radio Five Live when quizzed on the severity of Shaw's injury: "I can’t tell. We have to wait minimum until tomorrow to see what’s going on. Clear, when you come off, it doesn’t look great."

ENJOYED THIS STORY?

Add GOAL.com as a preferred source on Google to see more of our reporting

THE BIGGER PICTURE

Shaw was one of the most important players in the United squad last season as Ten Hag guided the team to a third-place Premier League finish and Carabao Cup glory in his debut season at the helm. However, the Red Devils have only been able to call upon Shaw for 14 appearances to date in the 2023-24 campaign, and he might be facing another spell on the sidelines after this new blow.

New Zealand allrounder Grant Elliott has been named as a replacement for Corey Anderson, who has sustained a fracture to his left thumb

ESPNcricinfo staff09-Jan-2013New Zealand allrounder Grant Elliott has been named as a replacement for Corey Anderson, who has sustained a fracture to his left thumb, for the ODI series against South Africa.Anderson was struck on his hand while bowling during practice. He will be in a cast for the next two weeks, thus ending his chances of making his ODI debut on this tour. Anderson played in all three T20s against South Africa last month, scoring 17 runs in two innings and failing to take a wicket.Elliott, who grew up in Johannesburg, has played five Tests, 37 ODIs and a single T20 for New Zealand but hasn’t featured in an international game since December 2010. He has scored four fifties and a century in his ODI career. He has played only once before against South Africa, in the 2009 Champions Trophy.New Zealand will play three ODIs against South Africa, between January 19 and 25.

Chris Gayle scored his 21st century to earn West Indies a bonus-point win against Sri Lanka in the first ODI of the tri-series at Sabina Park

The Report by Devashish Fuloria28-Jun-2013
Scorecard and ball-by-ball detailsChris Gayle followed his own modus operandi – dead-bats to hittable deliveries, axe-swings against good ones•AFPChris Gayle had failed to leave a mark in cold and wet England, but he probably knows there is only one thing cool in the warmer climes of Jamaica – he himself. And no one at Sabina Park would disagree. After a lean patch in the Champions Trophy where his highest score was 39, Gayle scored his 21st ODI century – his first against Sri Lanka – as West Indies brushed the visitors aside by six wickets and earned a bonus point in the first match of the tri-series.Sri Lanka didn’t have a strong total to defend after their batsmen were felled by the spin of Sunil Narine, who picked up four wickets. Angelo Mathews kept his main bowlers on throughout to try and ensnare the big fish, but Gayle kept blocking, blocking, and then powering it over the ropes with metronomic precision.It was a typically ‘measured’ Gayle innings, following its own rhythm, irrespective of the conditions, the pitch, the attack, and the field. He followed his own modus operandi – dead-bats to hittable deliveries, axe-swings against good ones – giving not even an inkling of a chance to the fielding side and hitting at least a six off each of the five bowlers he faced.Defending a middling total, Sri Lanka knew Gayle was one hurdle they had to get past quickly, but it wasn’t to be. Mathews opened with Lasith Malinga and Nuwan Kulasekara as expected, but introduced Ajantha Mendis in the fifth over to see if Mendis could do what Narine had done in the first innings. Mathews persisted with fielders in catching positions, however, Gayle was in no hurry. Whenever it seemed a hit was needed, he had one.But despite Gayle hitting three sixes and four fours in the first 10 overs, West Indies hadn’t run away. Johnson Charles was doing his best to keep Sri Lanka interested with a laboured stay. There couldn’t have been a starker contrast. Charles struggled to read Mendis’ spin and the quicks’ swing, his misery prolonged by first, a dropped catch by Mathews, and then, by the umpire who let him get away against two good lbw appeals. He finally hit his first boundary – a six – off his 45th ball, but from West Indies’ perspective, he helped put up 115 for the opening stand.Darren Bravo joined Gayle and the two put up a quick 66-run stand to bring West Indies within touching distance of the target. The big wicket did come, when Gayle finally top-edged a sweep that was intended for the stands. There was a minor flutter as Sri Lanka picked two more wickets in the next three overs, but it was a case of too little too late.Sri Lanka’s openers had also laid a solid foundation with a half-century stand after being put in, but their lower middle order failed yet again to shore up a faltering innings after Narine dismissed both Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara. But for a fighting half-century by Mathews, they could have finished with much less than the eventual score.Jayawardene, opening for only the 26th time in 370 ODI innings, scored an effortless half-century at run-a-ball, finding the boundary with silken drives and precise cuts. He greeted Narine with a reverse-swept boundary to bring up his fifty, but was out two balls later inside-edging a sharply-turning delivery to his pads, the ball lobbing up for the wicketkeeper for a simple chance. Sangakkara was dismissed soon after, tamely pushing a flighted delivery to cover.The situation was tailor-made for the much talked-about, but yet to fire, young brigade – Mathews, Dinesh Chandimal and Lahiru Thirimanne – to send a message to their detractors. But Mathews, dropped on 7, decided thereafter to curtail his strokemaking while Chandimal and Thirimanne allowed the pressure to build and fell to soft dismissals, reducing the innings to a crawl.Only 15 runs came in the seven overs after the 28th and by the time they were forced to take the batting Powerplay, Sri Lanka were left with little firepower to take advantage. The Powerplay brought further damage. Ravi Rampaul picked up two quick wickets and Sri Lanka were left trying to use up the full quota of overs rather than going for runs.That shouldn’t take away anything from the way West Indies came back. Dwayne Bravo had elected to field hoping his fast bowlers would exploit the early moisture in the pitch, but it was Bravo who provided the first strike, getting Upul Tharanga to edge to the keeper. There was no looking back once Narine, who now has 33 wickets from 14 matches at home, was introduced. Gayle then provided the ideal finishing touches.

The seesaw battle on the second day ensured the series lead would be decided by what is effectively a one-innings shootout

The Report by George Binoy18-Nov-2012
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details
Angelo Mathews helped rescue Sri Lanka from the depths of 50 for 5•Associated PressThe Galle Test is shaping up to be a game of small margins. The seesaw battle on the second day reinforced as much, and ensured the series lead would be decided by what is effectively a one-innings shootout.During the first hour, New Zealand made inroads so deep into Sri Lanka’s line-up that they were well placed to press for a sizeable first-innings advantage. Over the next three, though, Sri Lanka’s captain and his deputy restored parity and then gained the ascendency. The good times did not last as long as the hosts would have liked, and the upshot of New Zealand’s resurgence post tea was a mere 26-run lead for the hosts. The visitors, however, could not erase the deficit without suffering damage.In response to New Zealand’s first-innings total of 221, Sri Lanka resumed on 9 for 1 on the second day, and their batsmen were subjected to a severe examination. Tim Southee and Trent Boult used the conditions, and a ball that was only five overs old, expertly, and made the batsmen play by moving the ball off straight lines and difficult lengths.Southee struck in the first over, slanting a full delivery across the left-hand opener Tharanga Paranavitana, who drove at one he could have left. The ball bent back into him and hit the stumps off the inside edge. In his second over, Southee sent down a volley of outswingers and drew edges from night-watchman Suraj Randiv off successive deliveries. Brendon McCullum dropped the first at third slip, but Martin Guptill held the next at second.At the other end, Boult beat Kumar Sangakkara by pitching around off stump from over the wicket, drawing the left-hand batsman forward, and seaming the ball away. He did this repeatedly, and eventually hit Sangakkara’s edge. This time McCullum caught it in the cordon. Three wickets had fallen in four overs and Sri Lanka were 20 for 4.Southee continued to test the right-handers. Another outswinger had Thilan Samaraweera cutting and edging past Ross Taylor at first slip, but it was the inswinger that dismissed him, after he offered no shot and was hit on the pad. Sri Lanka had lost four wickets in the first hour, and Angelo Mathews joined Mahela Jayawardene. The tide was about to turn.The pressure was beginning to ease: the ball was older, and Southee and Boult were being eased out of the attack after their opening spells. New Zealand’s support cast wasn’t as threatening.Doug Bracewell, the first-change seamer, immediately offered Jayawardene a short and wide ball that was cut for four, and after he changed ends, Mathews drove straight and through cover as well. Bracewell’s day did not get better and he went for 67 in 16 wicketless overs. Jeetan Patel was brought on just before the lunch break and Jayawardene attacked him, skipping out of his crease and lofting over the midwicket boundary. Sri Lanka ended the first session on 105 for 5.The second session was emphatically theirs – 85 runs and no wicket. There was almost no seam or swing movement in the afternoon and the batsmen progressed to their half-centuries. Jayawardene reached his off 76 balls, while Mathews slogged Patel for six and flicked Bracewell for four to get there off 70 deliveries. The 100-run stand came at more than four runs per over. So at ease was Mathews that he felt confident enough to reverse-swat Patel to the point boundary and eventually outscored his captain. At tea, the partnership was worth 140 and Sri Lanka were trailing by only 31.Sri Lanka had moved within 15 runs of drawing level with New Zealand when James Franklin broke through, drawing an edge from Mathews to earn his first Test wicket since 2009. The hosts also lost Prasanna Jayawardene before the lead was taken and Mahela eventually took his team ahead via a reverse-swept boundary off Patel.Patel, however, denied Mahela a hundred, when an attempted sweep resulted in the ball bobbing up off the glove and wicketkeeper Kruger van Wyk diving forward to take a sharp catch. Mahela walked before the umpire had revealed his decision. Sri Lanka were eventually dismissed for 247 and New Zealand were left with 12 overs to face in the fading light, 26 runs in arrears.McCullum did not survive; he heaved at a turning short ball from Rangana Herath and was caught on the move by Nuwan Kulasekara at deep midwicket. It was a loss New Zealand could have avoided. Kane Williamson and Martin Guptill wiped out the remainder of the deficit and took their team nine runs ahead before stumps.

Mike Hesson, the New Zealand coach, has called for green pitches when India tours New Zealand in January-February 2014

ESPNcricinfo staff24-Dec-2013Mike Hesson, the New Zealand coach, has called for green pitches when India tour New Zealand in January-February 2014. Hesson said New Zealand don’t get “any favours” in terms of pitches when they travel to India, and he would be “disappointed” if the curators do not dish out green seaming tracks for the two Tests in Auckland and Wellington.”We’ll back our seamers over anyone’s at the moment,” Hesson said, while emphasising New Zealand’s pitch preferences following a Test in Hamilton against West Indies where the surface was rather dry and spin-friendly. “We know these conditions as a batting group. Our batsmen bat on conditions that nip around in first-class cricket so they’re used to it and it can expose your technique if you’re not.”I think everyone’s aware of the type of surface that we’d like. We’ve been in India before and they’ve changed the pitch the day before a game because it wasn’t quite as dry as they would like. We certainly don’t get any favours when we travel, so I’d be disappointed if we provide any at home.”India play New Zealand in two Tests at Eden Park and Basin Reserve between February 6 and 18, following a five-match ODI series in January.On their last tour of New Zealand, in 2009, India won the three-Test series 1-0, registering victory in Hamilton with offspinner Harbhajan Singh taking a second-innings six-for. However, the previous time they visited New Zealand, in 2002, they were presented with tracks that were hardly distinguishable from the lush outfields in Wellington and Hamilton, and failed to score more than 161 in four innings.The Eden Park track, a drop-in pitch, generally offers good carry but isn’t a green seamer. Hesson said he was hopeful the ground’s new curator, Blair Christiansen, could deliver such a track though. “They’re a pretty skilful group up there, they know exactly what needs to be done,” he said.

How to watch Aberdeen vs Rangers in the Scottish Premiership in the US as well as kick-off time and team news.

Aberdeenare all set to take on Rangersin theScottish Premiership on Sunday.

Watch Aberdeen vs Rangers live on Paramount+ today!

Aberdeen, who are third in the league, are on a six-match winning streak and will aim to make seven wins in a row on Sunday.

Rangers will hope to end their campaign on a high and after their loss to rivals Celtic on April 8, they came back strongly to beat St. Mirren 5-2 last week.

GOAL brings you details on how to watch the game on TV in the US as well as how to stream live online.

GettyKick-off timeGame:Aberdeen vs RangersDate:April 8, 2023Kick-off:11:30 am EDTVenue:Pittodrie Stadium

The game is scheduled for April 23, 2023, at Pittodrie Stadium. It will kick off at 11:30 am EDT in the US.

AdvertisementGettyHow to watch Aberdeen vs Rangers online – TV channels & live streamsTV channels & streaming options

Country TV channel Live stream

U.S.N/A

Paramount+

In the United States (US) it will be available for streaming via Paramount+.

GettyTeam news & squadsAberdeen team news

Aberdeen will miss the service of their captain Graeme Shinnie who is serving a four-match suspension. In Shinnie's absence, Ylber Ramadani is likely to start in central midfield.

Position

Players

Goalkeepers

Lewis, Gorter, Roos, Ritchie

Defenders

MacKenzie, Scales, Pollock, Coulson, Richardson, MacDonald

Midfielders

McCrorie, Barron, Markanday, Myslovic, Ramadani, Hayes, Clarkson, Duncan

Forwards

Morris, Miovski, Duk, Watkins, Kennedy, Bavidge, Roberts, Harvey

Rangers team news

Rangers have a long injury list. They will miss the services of Ryan Jack, Tom Lawrence, Kemar Roofe, Filip Helander, Ridvan Yilmaz, Connor Goldson and Ryan Kent against Aberdeen.

Meanwhile, Antonio Colak, who has a calf injury, could feature in the matchday squad.

Position

Players

Goalkeepers

McGregor, McCrorie, K. Wright, McLaughlin

Defenders

Tavernier, Barisic, King, Devine, Davies

Midfielders

Lundstram, Hagi, Matondo, Kamara, Sands, S. Wright, McCann, Arfield, Lowry, Tillman, Cantwell, Raskin

Forwards

Colak, Morelos, Sakala.

Head-to-head record

Date Result Competition

15/1/2023Rangers 2-1 AberdeenLeague Cup21/12/2022Aberdeen 2-3 RangersPremiership29/10/2022Rangers 4-1 AberdeenPremiership5/3/2022Rangers 1-0 AberdeenPremiership19/1/2022Aberdeen 1-1 RangersPremiershipENJOYED THIS STORY?

Add GOAL.com as a preferred source on Google to see more of our reporting

GettyUseful links

Aberdeen team page

Live soccer on TV in the U.S.

Rangers team page

A round-up of the matches in the MiWAY T20 Challenge that took place on March 21

ESPNcricinfo staff22-Mar-2012An unbeaten 75-run partnership between David Miller and Daryn Smit helped Dolphins beat Cape Cobras at Kingsmead. Chasing 121, Dolphins had a blip just after the Powerplay as they tumbled from a comfortable 44 for 1 to 49 for 3 within the space of 13 balls. However, Smit and Miller saw through a period of seven boundary-less overs before cutting loose to complete the chase with seven balls to spare. In their innings, Cape Cobras lost wickets at regular intervals and struggled to build any momentum. It was only in the last over of the innings, when Alistair Gray hit two sixes and a boundary in a 21-run over off Kyle Abbot, to set-up a run-a-ball target.Titans claimed a bonus-point win to jump to the second spot in the points-table with their eight-wicket win (D/L method) over Warriors at SuperSport Park. In a rain-affected game, Warriors had a quick start to their innings. Wayne Parnell, who hit four boundaries and a six in his 23, was the first batsman to be out after 35 runs had been scored off 3.5 overs. A brace of wickets in Alfonso Thomas’ next over and a further two in Albie Morkel’s second over derailed Warriors charge as they were reduced to 64 for 6 after 13.1 overs when the rains intervened. Chasing a readjusted target of 60 in 11 overs, Titans achieved their target in the eighth over.Impi’s search for their first victory in the competition ended in disappointment as their game against table-toppers Lions was washed out at Willowmoore Park, Benoni. Luke Wright scored a 28-ball 45 as Impi raised 80 for the loss of four wickets in 11 overs but persistent rain led to a washout.Titans now host third-placed Knights for the qualifier on Sunday. The winner of the game will face Lions in the final on April 1.

Jesse Ryder has been banned for six months after testing positive for a banned substance. He will, however, be able to play again after October 19 once the retrospective ban ends

ESPNcricinfo staff20-Aug-2013New Zealand batsman Jesse Ryder has been banned for six months after failing a drug test in March. He will be available to play again after October 19, once the retrospective penalty ends.Ryder underwent a routine drug test while playing a Ford Trophy match for Wellington on March 24. He tested positive for 1-Phenylbutan-2-amine (PBA) and N, alpha-diethyl-benzeneethanamine (DEBEA), which are banned in sports.Ryder was informed of the result on April 12 and attended a hearing before the New Zealand Sports Tribunal earlier this month, where the ban was handed down. The batsman will not contest the decision of the tribunal.According to the Tribunal, Ryder “‘may not during the period of ineligibility participate in any capacity in a competition or activity authorised or organised by New Zealand Cricket or a cricket club or other member organisation”.The mandatory punishment for a drug violation is a two-year ban, but Ryder was given a lighter sentence because he could establish that he did not use drugs to improve his performance. He was also able to attribute the source of the drugs to a dietary supplement that he was taking as part of a weight-loss programme.According to news reports, Ryder made some enquiries about the supplement on his own and decided to take it after concluding that it did not contain any banned substances. However, he did not contact Drug Free Sport, an anti-doping organisation, to check whether the product was on its list of banned substances. After he tested positive, he commissioned an independent forensic analysis, which confirmed the presence of the substances and traced them to the dietary supplement.In a statement released by the New Zealand Cricket Players’ Association, Ryder said: “I’m devastated by this situation. I’ve never taken drugs and to be in this situation distresses me greatly. I simply took the supplement alongside a training programme I was completing to help me lose weight. I have attended anti-doping education seminars during my time in cricket and am a strong supporter of Drug Free Sport New Zealand. I’m aware of the precautions you need to take; I did take steps to check the supplement but ultimately it was my responsibility and I accept that. Whilst everyone is aware of my well-documented battles with alcohol, it’s important for me to state that I abhor drug use of any kind, both recreational and performance-enhancing in sport.”Ryder, who has played 18 Tests and 39 ODIs for New Zealand so far, took a sabbatical from international cricket in 2012, choosing to focus on his fitness and domestic cricket. Earlier this year, Ryder was assaulted outside a bar in Christchurch and spent two days in a medically induced coma before making a recovery. In July, Ryder announced his decision to leave Wellington and represent Otago in the forthcoming domestic season.

Suresh Raina has said the combination of two new balls and only four deep fielders was putting tremendous pressure on bowlers in ODIs, but added there was no choice for them but to adjust and learn to cope

ESPNcricinfo staff22-Oct-2013Suresh Raina has said the combination of two new balls and only four deep fielders was putting tremendous pressure on bowlers in ODIs, but added there was no choice for them but to adjust and learn to cope.”I think it’s tough for the bowlers,” Raina said in Ranchi ahead of the fourth ODI against Australia. “We have to admit that. When five fielders are inside (the circle), and if a regular bowler can’t keep it tight, it will be very difficult for a part-timer. There’s pressure on bowlers on what line and length to bowl. They have to be very sure of what their plans are and how they have to bowl to each batsman.”You can bowl two bouncers, but there are four other deliveries to bowl also. The ball doesn’t reverse much because it’s quite new. The ball is only 25 overs old at the most. Even spinners don’t get that much turn. But whatever it is, we have to adjust to how things are. We can’t give excuses. We just have to bat well and bowl well. No doubt it’s good for batsmen, and we have no complaints. We have to play by the rules that the ICC makes, and as players do our jobs.”Raina also backed the beleaguered Ishant Sharma to rebound strongly, after the fast bowler conceded 30 runs in the 48th over of Australia’s chase to lose India the Mohali ODI. Ishant has been the most expensive specialist bowler in the series, going for 7.87 runs an over. “It can happen to any bowler in the last few overs,” Raina said. “Ishant has practised well in the last two days. I hope he stays strong in his mind, and if he stays positive, we’ll definitely see a good performance from him. He has worked very hard in the last two days. I hope he will come back strongly against Australia tomorrow.”Twice in three games, the home batsmen have been unsettled by Australia’s quick bowlers, especially Mitchell Johnson, but Raina denied the visitors had gained any psychological advantage over India. “I wouldn’t say we are under pressure. We won the first game (T20) in Rajkot, then they won in Pune, and then we won again in Jaipur and they won after that. It’s a good contest. We are both young teams.”Sometimes our batting clicks, sometimes our bowling does. But whoever does well on the day, whoever has good plans and positivity and can feel good about themselves is important. Everyone talks about so much cricket happening, but it’s important to see how you’re feeling, how mentally strong and tough you are.”Johnson bowled well no doubt, and he had luck on his side. There’s no doubt the batsmen have to do well in the middle order – Yuvi paa (Yuvraj Singh), (Ravindra) Jadeja and myself. We’ll have to take responsibility and bat well.”Raina has made 39 & 17, Yuvraj 7 & 0 and Jadeja 11 & 2 in the series. In Mohali, it was MS Dhoni who revived India from 76 for 4 with his ninth ODI hundred. Dhoni accelerated gradually to play several powerful strokes at the death, and also brought out his trademark helicopter swing, a shot Raina said belonged completely to the India captain.”That is a Mahi-bhai exclusive. It’s very difficult to play that shot. You have to pick the length early. He has played it for many years. When someone is bowling yorkers at 140-145 (kph) and the ball is aimed at the toes, you have to put the entire load on the back and turn the bat. Other players have their own quality shots, but the helicopter shot suits only him, and it won’t suit others. He always clears the rope with it because he has that kind of strength. All players try to hit low full tosses to midwicket or over the bowler’s head, but you need to practice that shot a lot.”

22-Jun-2012Danish KANERIA & Mervyn WESTFIELD1.DETERMINATION2.A Disciplinary Panel of the Cricket Discipline Commission (Gerard Elias QC, Chair; David Gabbitass & Jamie Dalrymple) sat between 18th and 22nd June 2012, in the Hearing Room of Sport Resolutions UK, to consider Disciplinary Charges brought by the England & Wales Cricket Board (ECB) against Danish Kaneria & Mervyn Westfield.Ian Mill QC & Nick de Marco represented ECB
Tim Moloney QC & Steven Hourigan represented DK.
M Milliken-Smith QC represented Mervyn Westfield3.Introduction4.These proceedings arise from charges brought in relation to events which occurred towards the end of the 2009 English domestic cricket season at a Pro40 Competition match played at Durham between Essex and Durham.5.Danish Kaneria contested the two charges brought against him but, on the first day of the proceedings, Mervyn Westfield pleaded guilty to the single charge against him and his case was put back for later consideration of the appropriate penalty.6.ChargesDanish Kaneria1Alleged a breach of 2009 Directive 3.8.5 in that Danish Kaneria induced or encouraged, or attempted to induce or encourage, Mervyn Westfield not to perform on his merits, that is, to deliberately concede a minimum number of runs in his first over of the match between Essex and Durham.2Alleged a breach of 2009 Directive 3.3 in that Danish Kaneria conducted himself in such a manner as may bring the game of cricket or any cricketer into disrepute by inducing or encouraging Mervyn Westfield not to perform on his merits.Mervyn Westfield1Alleged a breach of 2009 Directive 3.8.15 in that Mervyn Westfield received a reward, resulting from his conduct in the Durham Essex match, which could bring him or the game of cricket into disrepute.This charge reflected Westfield’s admission to the Crown Court (see para 9 below) that he had been paid £6000 for agreeing to deliberately concede a given minimum number of runs in his first over as a bowler in the Durham v Essex Pro 40 match on 5th September 2009.7.IngredientsIn essence, therefore, on the facts alleged, to establish the contested charges , the ECB was required to prove that:1 Danish Kaneria knowingly induced or encouraged Mervyn Westfield not to perform on his merits in the Durham match.2 Danish Kaneria conducted himself in such a manner as to bring cricket or a cricketer into disrepute – and the ECB put its case on this charge upon the same factual basis as Charge 1, namely that his conduct as shown in Charge 1 brought the game into disrepute.8.Burden & Standard of ProofThe burden of proving the charges falls on the ECB who bring them. We heard submissions in relation to the appropriate Standard of Proof.We are satisfied that the appropriate standard of proof is proof on the balance of probabilities but, that having regard to the grave nature of the allegations and the consequences of any finding of guilt in relation to them that we should look for very cogent proof before making any adverse finding against Danish Kaneria. The Panel concluded that in reality this meant that we should be sure of any fact before we relied upon it as proving a case against Danish Kaneria.9.Background FactsDanish Kaneria is a Pakistani national and a professional international cricketer of great repute and experience. He played for Essex County Cricket Club for 6 seasons between 2004 -2010 as an overseas player. He signed annual undertakings to abide by the ECB’s Rules Regulations and Directives whilst registered at Essex.Mervyn Westfield was a professional cricketer with Essex from 2005 until 2010. In that time, he played 7 County Championship matches and 8 first team one day matches.Westfield was charged by the CPS in November 2010 with accepting a corrupt payment (£6000) contrary to section 1(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 and on January 12 2012 he pleaded guilty to that charge. On 17 February 2012, Westfield was sentenced to a term of 4 months imprisonment and the £6000 was confiscated.Arun or Anu Bhatt is an Indian businessman who, prior to November 2007, had come to the notice of the Anti Corruption & Security Unit (ACSU) of the International Cricket Council as allegedly being heavily involved in illegal betting.10.Specific EvidenceAlan Peacock is a Senior Investigator in ACSU based in Dubai.We accept his unchallenged evidence that in April 2008 he warned Danish Kaneria that Anu Bhatt was heavily involved in illegal betting and was therefore “highly inappropriate company” for Kaneria to be keeping.Danish Kaneria told him that he had known Anu Bhatt since mid 2005 and, with his wife, had visited his home in India in November 2007 for dinner. Kaneria told us that thereafter he regarded Bhatt as a “dangerous ” man with whom to be involved.Mervyn Westfield gave evidence to us. His account was obviously central and vital to the prosecution case.We remind ourselves that there are reasons to scrutinise his evidence with great care – he has admitted his own involvement and may have a reason to lie to implicate another or others, and minimise his own involvement or responsibility. We have borne this very much in mind in considering his evidence.We remind ourselves also that Westfield’s accounts have not been uniformly honest or consistent – putting it straightforwardly and shortly, in various ways and over a period of time, he sought to minimise his involvement and it was not until his final plea to the Crown Court or even, arguably, his evidence to us in these proceedings, that he accepted not only that he had received corrupt money but also that he had not performed on his merits.Of course, therefore, we must scrutinise his evidence with great care and look for independent support for his account before using any of it against Danish Kaneria.What did we make of him?In summary, we are satisfied that in September 2009 he was both vulnerable & naïve – relatively unworldly & unsophisticated. He may well have been going through a phase of self doubt and anxiety – whether objectively justified or not – about his cricketing future.The key parts of his evidence about events late in August and early September 2009 – essentially the core of the prosecution case – can be summarised as follows:Danish Kaneria told him about spot fixing & said “you are young & its hard to make money; I have a way that you can make money quicker”.Kaneria introduced him to two Asian men & they went to Dukes nightclub where one man “flashed his money around”; At the Essex training ground a direct approach was made by one of the Asian men to Westfield that he would receive payment if he conceded more than 12 runs in his first over in the Durham match. When the squad for Durham was known, Kaneria asked Westfield if he would go through with the plan. Thereafter, there was pressure from the Asian man and Kaneria to go through with the plan, culminating in a meeting in Durham on the night before the match in the hotel where the Asian men were staying. Kaneria at this time was saying “It will be easy”; “You won’t get caught”; ” Lots of people have put money on the game, you have to do it”. Westfield did not perform on his merits in the match & believed he had deliberately conceded the agreed amount of runs in the relevant over. In Kaneria’s car, after leaving the car park in Chelmsford around midnight or later – after returning from Durham by coach – Westfield was accompanied by Kaneria & the two Asian men, one of whom gave him a parcel which contained £6000.There is no doubt – and no suggestion to the contrary – that one of the Asian men referred to by Westfield was Anu Bhatt. Indeed, Danish Kaneria admits introducing Westfield to Bhatt in Dukes nightclub and confirms in his evidence that Bhatt was in Durham and attended the match with tickets obtained by Kaneria for him.Mr Moloney QC invites us to say that because of Westfield’s earlier & sustained prevarications and lies, that Westfield is a witness who can carry no credibility and whose evidence is thus worthless.All members of this panel reject that submission. Not only did we all form the view that in these important particulars, Westfield was plainly telling the truth, we are fortified in our conclusions by other independent evidence which on any common sense analysis strongly supports his core account, from which, it is right to say, he was essentially unwavering in evidence to us.I refer, of course, firstly to the evidence of telephone and text contacts between Bhatt and Kaneria through the critical days running up to and immediately after the Durham match. It is plainly nonsensical to claim – as Danish Kaneria does – that these are explicable as being mere inconsequential social intercourse with no significance whatsoever. Rather, we have no doubt, they support in material particulars the account of Westfield and evidence the obvious planning required to set up and pressurise – as well as pay off – the man selected to perform this nefarious task of spot fixing.We would observe, also, that these contacts, both in degree and substance, tend to give the lie to the suggestion made by Danish Kaneria repeatedly that he wished to keep this “dangerous” man at arms length.Secondly, there is what we might describe as the Geographical Whereabouts evidence – was it the merest coincidence that:Bhatt was introduced to Westfield at Dukes Nightclub by Kaneria?
Bhatt was present on the ground in Durham because Kaneria obtained the tickets for him?We have no doubt that the answer is no – and that these are yet further pointers that the core account of Westfield to us is true.There is a third area of evidence which tends to support Westfield’s core account – that is the evidence of the other Essex players to the effect, taken together, that on more than one occasion on coach journeys, Danish Kaneria sought to instigate discussion about spot or match fixing.We acknowledge that not all the detailed evidence given about this chimes precisely together – but that is hardly surprising given the time that has elapsed. What is striking, however, is the overwhelming impression of most that it was Danish Kaneria who initiated the discussions about ways of making money on the rest of the Pro 40 programme. This, coupled with the evidence of some players of a more direct approach to sound them out, leaves us in no doubt that these conversations and approaches were designed to “test the water” – to see who might succumb to the pressure to make corrupt money.It is right to record that all the players approached or made part of any conversation did not take the matter seriously. We observe that this was 2009 and very different education for county cricketers exists now from what was in place then in respect of Anti-Corruption training.We have in mind the further points made, suggesting that Westfield is not to be believed including: the questions and answers and explanation or lack of it for the money in excess of £6000 in Westfield’s bank account;
The 30th August point – it was that day it is suggested that Kaneria took Westfield to Dukes;On balance, and principally because of the telephone and text message evidence, we favour the view that the Dukes Nightclub visit was likely to have been after 30 August – but we do not make that finding with certainty, However, we conclude, that whenever it occurred, Kaneria introduced Bhatt to Westfield and that this introduction was for the purpose of facilitating betting and spot fixing and not for some innocent social reason.11.Danish KaneriaIt is a trite but true comment that some of the most cogent evidence for the prosecution often comes from the mouth of the defendant himself.We have borne in mind the fact that Danish Kaneria is a man of hitherto good character, with good character references, and that we should be slow to disbelieve the account he gives.However, we consider that in many respects the evidence of Danish Kaneria simply does not stand up to scrutiny and is plainly lies.We utterly reject his account of the telephone calls and texts to and from Anu Bhatt during the vital days in question. Analysis of the length, sequence and timing of these calls simply does not permit of the innocent explanations given by Kaneria. If, as we find, he is lying about these calls and texts, there can only be one logical reason – to tell the truth would be damning.Further, we reject as nonsensical Kaneria’s claim that his invitation to Bhatt to attend Dukes Nightclub was in order to keep him at arms length or similarly that obtaining tickets for him in Durham was with the same object. Again, we have no doubt that to tell the truth would implicate Kaneria as the link in the chain between Westfield and Bhatt.There were many other unsatisfactory aspects to Danish Kaneria’s evidence – not least the grasp of detailed recollections years after the event when two years before little more than a glimmer of recollection appeared to surface.However, in the light of our findings as to the significant aspects of Westfield and Kaneria’s evidence, it is perhaps unnecessary to dwell any further on the evidence of Danish Kaneria. We reject his basic account that he had nothing to do with any arrangement between Westfield and Bhatt – indeed we are sure that he facilitated it.12.His WitnessesWe have considered carefully the evidence of Faran Kaneria & Mohammed Afzaal Nasir but conclude that it does not disturb our sure findings in relation to the reliability of Westfield on the core points. It does not follow from our findings that either of these witnesses was necessarily untruthful – as submitted by Mr Mill QC for the ECB, there are a number of possible permutations as to the date of the Dukes Nightclub visit.We record here that we have considered all the evidence put forward on behalf of Kaneria by way of written statement and taken it into account in reaching our conclusions.We also record the fact that during the hearing and when giving evidence, Danish Kaneria had the benefit of an experienced interpreter.13.ConclusionsHaving heard and considered all the evidence and submissions made to us, we are left in no doubt that in late August/ early September 2009:Danish Kaneria knew the activity which Anu Bhatt was engaged in;Kaneria acted as a recruiter of spot fixers for Anu Bhatt;That Kaneria approached a number of what he saw as potential targets at Essex; Kaneria introduced Bhatt to Westfield with the intention that Westfield should be recruited into spot fixing;Thereafter, Kaneria cajoled and pressurised Westfield into becoming involved, well knowing that he was young and vulnerable;Kaneria was present at the meeting in Durham with Westfield and the two Asian men – one of whom was Anu BhattKaneria was present when Westfield was paid out by the Asian men.It follows from these findings that we are left in no reasonable doubt thatDanish Kaneria knowingly induced or encouraged Mervyn Westfield not to perform on his merits in the Durham match such that the first charge against him is made out.Further, it is self evident that such conduct brings the game of cricket and cricketers into disrepute and thus Charge 2 is also proved.Later today we shall consider submissions in relation to the appropriate penalties to be applied.Gerard Elias QC (Chairman)
David Gabbitass
Jamie Dalrymple 22-06-2012