Who is more guilty a spot fixer or a player who retire from one format just for the same reason --Money?

Question

A spot fixer might have one or two no ball & that would give him few bucks .which not necessarily affect teams winning or defeat but when a well establish ,star player declare retirement in one format cz of the same thing which is money (this decision could/will lead to defeat of his team in future) then why that player is not same guilty or worst than a simple spot fixer .I mean yes we can't put those self declare retire player in jail in our present justice system but what about the moral issue .Are they really any good or better than a spot or even than a match fixer .i feel they are worse cz they will not give any service to their national team cz of other countries domestic league & that is how they are betraying their country .I m talking about player like gayle ,pieterson(though he is actually african,he betrayed two country ),mallinga ,there are more to come in the list

Update:

summary a spot fixer get jail time + 5 year ban but those retire players get more money ...reward .

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

A player knows what to do for his own life, nowadays money is more important than anything, for cricket the players have only 10 to 15 years, in the mean time they want to earn so much money to secure their life.. 
It's very easy to say money is not everything. But everybody needs money. Can you stop your work & watch cricket all the day without worrying about money??? Give those cricketers a life folks. It's their life and they have the right to choose.
ODIs & T20s are so compressed in nature, a couple of deliveries or a single over could influence the eventual outcome of a match. Here, spot fixing, even a single deliberate no-ball, can alter the result. It's against the spirit of the sport. A player should always play the game with great spirit.
So your comparison is meaningless here.

T J · Answer

I think to retire with a clear conscious and without guilt, after serving your country, is fair enough, even for money. 
Reason being a spot fixer or match fixer is making money from the nefarious activities and charging the nation for his services, whereas he has country interest in the least, in his heart and actions on the field.
That's the reason a fixer goes to the jail, when he is caught and a retiree might not make same amount of money, as he is losing money from his national duty but is having a clear guilty free conscious for sure. My vote for the retiring honest cricketer any time..

small · Answer

Spot-fixing is illegal whereas retiring in one format to earn more money in other formats elsewhere may at the worst be just unethical if the country suffers on that count. Moreover, in professional sports, the ethics is not to be taken to mean patriotism to the extent of losing personal income from the sport that you have taken up as a living.

MOJOJO · Answer

The later one is earning money legally and it's just.

Seriously dude how can you even compare a match fixer with a player who wants to earn more money legally without cheating, without backstabbing his teammates, and his country.

Bill P · Answer

The spot fixers are breaking the law so they are guilty of a crime. The others are just guilty of avarice.

jebi jash · Answer

those who think about it is even gulity

Farjad Khushabii · Answer

our administration should be guilty

Anonymous · Answer

both

Trending News

Who is more guilty a spot fixer or a player who retire from one format just for the same reason --Money?

8 Answers