Over 25 years ago the greatest cricket scandal in South African history started at Centurion in a test match between South Africa and England. Due to poor weather that limited play, the match was due to end in a dull draw until South African captain Hansie Cronje offered a double declaration to England captain Nasser Hussain.
Under this offer each team would forfeit an innings and allow the Test match to be a single-innings shootout that could deliver a result. Naturally, the idea of a result being engineered excited fans and elevated Cronje’s reputation as one of the great thinkers of the game.
As it turned out, Cronje’s motivations had as much to do with the existence of the opaque world of gamblers and bookmakers who make a living out of playing the odds as they did with love for the game. In the case of cricket matches, the result where a team wins is a far more lucrative proposition than a draw that looked inevitable from the moment the rains hit Centurion and lingered for the first four days.
One bookmaker had somehow managed to get close enough to Cronje to whisper in his ear the idea of a double forfeit in exchange for cash and a leather jacket. When the truth emerged the cricket world was horrified by the idea that the sport of gentlemen had been infiltrated by the shady universe of gambling. The Centurion test would later be referred to as cricket’s “end of innocence”.
Back then the world of gambling was thought to be mainly confined to lavish casinos and shady betting houses that had little influence on the conduct of sportspeople on the field. The beauty of sport is the idea that skills are pitted against each other with the primary motivation of victory rather than an exercise manipulated for profit.
The shame reflected the sensibilities of the time, where bookmakers and their opaque activities existed in obscurity. Punters would either head to casinos or racetracks, where they would take their chances.
These days the world is materially different, and gambling and its associated activities have become increasingly socialised. Even sports venues are emblazoned with advertising for various gambling sites that glamourises gambling.
In a country where many people live on fragile incomes, the idea of a lucky day that might solve all financial problems is naturally tempting and can lead people to take what little they have and gamble in the hope of getting lucky.
The scale of the problem has been mentioned in parliamentary conversations and in various reports that seek to ring the alarm bell on the problems associated with gambling.
Recently the Old Mutual Savings & Investment Monitor reported that the incidence and frequency of gambling among its survey participants showed concerning trends. More than 53% of participants confessed to being gamblers and more than 40% indicated that they gamble to offset expenses or cover debts.
The National Gambling Board reports that across 4,000 participants 65% engaged in gambling and 31% showed signs of problem gambling. Recipients of social grants and National Student Financial Aid Scheme funding are similarly increasingly trapped in the gambling universe. The consequence is that the socioeconomic fallout transcends financial and psychological effects and affects families.
The proliferation of online platforms that are marketed aggressively on platforms such as phones, or even embedded advertising when we buy other products, means we are all within range of gambling companies. The intersections between sports and gambling are reflected in that 60% of gamblers cite sports betting as their engagement point.
Given the evident vulnerabilities, particularly among those managing fragile incomes, the risk of the problem getting worse requires some difficult decisions to be made. That a world that just 25 years ago was horrified at the link between gambling and sport can find itself here would be intriguing even to the late Cronje himself.
• Sithole is an accountant, academic and activist.
Business Day
