When West Indies were accused of ‘throwing’ an ODI: The Lloyd vs David Syme & Co. Ltd case

Two days had passed since West Indies’ defeat against Australia in the final league match of Benson & Hedges World Series Cup, 1981-82, at SCG. Pakistan, who had been as good as anyone else in the tournament, were eliminated as Australia and West Indies were scheduled to clash for a best-of-five finals. Then, on January 21, 1982, The Age (Melbourne) published an article by David Thorpe, accusing West Indies of not giving their all in the SCG encounter; and all hell broke loose, with a string of lawsuits following one another. Abhishek Mukherjee re-collects the historic Lloyd vs David Syme & Co. Ltd case. The scenario The equation was simple: West Indies were at the top of the table, with 7 wins (14 points) from 9 matches; Pakistan, on 8 points from 10 matches, and Australia, 6 from 9. In other words, a West Indian win would have ensured a West Indies vs Pakistan final. However, an Australian win would bring run rate into the equation. Before the match, Pakistan’s run rate read 3.80, and Australia’s, 4.16. A win would ideally seal the case for Australia. A ‘record’ crowd of 52,053 turned up for the match at SCG on January 19. Greg Chappell put West Indies in, and Gordon Greenidge and Desmond Haynes both played onto the stumps, and Larry Gomes did not last long either, caught ‘acrobatically’ by Rod Marsh off Len Pascoe. The score read 40 for 3. But Viv Richards, deputising for Clive Lloyd (down with influenza), took charge: he drove Jeff Thomson past mid-wicket and moved outside leg to loft Mick Malone over extra-cover. He lost Faoud Bacchus, but batted on, unperturbed; Thomson, Malone, and Pascoe, and most significantly, Dennis Lillee, could not subdue him. He reached his fifty in 80 balls but fell for 64, trying to cover-drive Thomson and losing his off-stump. Jeff Dujon batted with gumption; Malcolm Marshall, braving back pain, “played with considerable poise and with a sensible mix of ‘bunting’ and belting” (Mike Coward, The Age) added valuable runs, remaining unbeaten on 32; and Sylvester Clarke hit out at the end. West Indies were bowled out for 189. A win would see Australia through. Wood and Border set up victory Disaster struck early when Graeme Wood tried to hook Michael Holding and fell for 1. But Rick Darling and John Dyson settled down, adding 51 for the second wicket. Andy Roberts removed Darling, who “fell to a marvellous catch by Clarke at mid-off”. Two balls later Chappell was trapped leg-before — for his sixth duck of the season (fourth in ODIs). Dyson continued to grind but ran into a row with Joel Garner. He was not happy after the big man had apparently tried to come in his way during a run. Garner responded by clean bowling him. Roberts clean bowled Kim Hughes; and Marsh “fell to an extraordinary catch” by Greenidge off Marshall. Australia reached 146 for 6 in 41 overs. West Indies had scored at 3.78. Given the archaic rules, they needed to be on 156 at that stage to win the match on run rate — which suddenly seemed a possibility; there was rain in the air. While all this was going on, Wood had been at it in the pavilion, with the calculator. He had been calculating the par score since the 29th over, and had sent out instructions. Allan Border and Lillee went for the shots (unlike Duckworth-Lewis, wickets were not a ‘resource’ of the equation. They added 11, but Holding struck timber, sending Lillee back.The score read 157 for 7 in 42 overs when Pascoe joined Allan Border. They needed 159 at this stage. Border had been acquiring singles, proceeding almost unnoticed, as had been the case throughout his career. On this occasion, he went after Garner, taking another 11 — which included four overthrows by Clarke. They were 168 for 7 in 43 overs, now ahead of the required 163. Holding bowled one more ball. There was no run. They were still ahead by 5. It was 9.58 PM when the drizzle began. Wood, “using technique learned in his days as a public relations officer in Perth, indicated in no uncertain terms that it was time for Border and Len Pascoe to retreat to the dressing-rooms” (Coward). Border later admitted: “When I knew we were in front it was time to head for home.” As a professional cricketer, he had a right to. Richards said in the press conference that he was ‘very disappointed,’ adding: “We did not come here to throw the match away. We came to try our very best.” They waited till 10.30 before announcing the result. Unfortunately, the rain stopped by 10.40, and the covers came off soon afterwards — but it was all too late.Australia finished with 8 points, at par with Pakistan, but their run rate of 4.14 was ahead of Pakistan’s 3.80. Roberts was named Man of the Match for his 10-3-15-3, and that was that. The Pakistanis were gracious in defeat. Team manager Ijaz Butt said: “The team watched the game in our hotel on TV and it was frustrating to see our hopes slip away on a chance shower of rain. But these rules were decided before the series started and we can only accept the situation.” The tragedy However, all was not well. Though over 52,000 people came to watch the match, there were many without tickets. One of them, a boy of 15, tried to watch the match from the roof of the manufacturers’ pavilion in the Sydney Showgrounds (adjacent to SCG) along with about 40 other children. The climb involved several ladders. At about 8 PM he somehow slipped and fell from a height of approximately 20 metres.He was rushed to St Vincent’s Hospital with severe head and back injuries, and succumbed to them later at night. Age catches up...  Two days after the match, David Thorpe wrote an article on The Age that ran with the title Come on,dollar, come on: “Had the West Indians won on Tuesday they would have played a best-of-five finals series against Pakistan. It is estimated that the West Indies-Australia finals will draw three times the crowds a West Indies-Pakistan series would have.” Thorpe added: “One wonders about the collective state of mind of the West Indians. Was it sportingly honest, the incentive to win? Or did the factors just mentioned — commercial pressures of crowds, gate money, sponsorship — bring about an unstated thought: ‘It doesn’t matter if we lose’? This thought edges perilously close to the concept of taking a dive.” And finally: “Two opposing teams with a common goal cannot be said to be competing in true faith to win each game as it comes ... Someone is playing with the faith of the people — with the single mindedness of a burglar blowing a safe.” The indicationswere clear. What went further wrong for The Age was the fact that Lloyd got to know of the article from Kerry Packer, no less. Interestingly, this was Wisden’s much less-talked-about take: “Realising they were ahead of the required rate, for the first time in their innings, the Australian batsmen raced for the pavilion and so joined West Indies in the finals, an achievement which was expected to make a difference of anything up to £500,000 to the Australian Cricket Board. A series of final matches between West Indies and Pakistan would have been much less of a money-spinner from the one now in prospect between Australia and West Indies.” Lloyd vs David Syme & Co. Ltd Though no player was mentioned, neither Lloyd nor his teammates were in any mood to accept such allegations. He was backed by the Australian cricketers, who were indirectly accused as well. Cricketers of both sides appointed Lloyd as their representative. Michael Manley, former Jamaican President, wrote in A History of West Indian Cricket: “It is impossible for one side to ‘throw’ a game without entering into a conspiracy with the members of the other side.” How wrong would he prove to be! On March 20, 1982The Age was sued for libel by 16 West Indian and 13 Australian cricketers.The trial took place in March 1984 at Melbourne. Tom Hughes, Queen’s Counsel (QC) for Lloyd, took a simple line of defence: the West Indians played the tournament for a flat fee, which did not depend on the gate money; hence it made no sense for them to throw a match. Documents also proved that West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) agreed to tours only for flat fees. Hence, there was no way West Indies would have gained by choosing their opposition for the final, for even the prize money had been announced beforehand. Hughes then accused The Age of indicating that the West Indians were ‘rigging’ the match. Lloyd, when questioned by Michael McHugh, QC for David Syme & Co. Ltd (who owned The Age),calmly responded that “his team had never done well against Australia under lights and there had been a long discussion among his team members and officials before the match to see what could be done to change this.” This was an understatement. It might sound astonishing, but till then (before the match in question) the teams had met in four day-night encounters and Australia had won all four. The match on January 19 only made it 5-0. McHugh also questioned Chappell, who stood by Lloyd, stressing on the fact that Lloyd had “an excellent reputation for honesty in cricket.” Lloyd duly won the case (and A$100,000 along with it) and promptly returned home.He had missed a Test (against Australia at Queen’s Park Oval), but came back for the last three Tests,claiming the series 3-0 for West Indies. Meanwhile, Syme & Co. Ltd appealed against the case at the Australian High Court on the grounds that a case for libel was not valid since no individual was named.Lloyd, especially, was not even playing the match. This time the verdict went in favour of The Age in November 1984. Justice Glass’ statement mentioned that the article was “directed solely to Mr Kerry Packer, on the basis of references to ‘one man’ and ‘somebody’.” But Lloyd was not one to accept defeat easily. He appealed to the Privy Council, no less.The case was the first to be presented to the House of Lords in the presence of Lords Keith, Elwyn-Jones, Roskill, and Griffiths on November 12, 1985. The decision was overturned. The Lords were unanimous in decision. Lord Keith read out the judgement: “The whole tone of the article seems to suggest or imply that the West Indies were not only not keenly inspired to win the match in question because they were already assured of a place in the final, but also motivated to lose because it would have financially desirable results for them. “The ordinary reader might well be disposed to wonder whether one man could fix either the World Series [baseball] in 1919 or the World Cup Series [sic] in 1981-82 without the co-operation of some of the players. “Their Lordships therefore consider the reasons given for allowing the respondents’ appeal on this branch of the case to have been unsound.” Lloyd won A$100,000 plus costs. The other players were paid A$25,000 each in an out-of-court settlement, as per Manley. Another significant aspect of the case was, to quote Manley:“it was the last event to be referred to the Privy Council before the Australian Constitution was amended to retain all appellate jurisdiction within Australia’s sovereign boundaries.” What happened to the tournament? Australia and West Indies clashed for the Best-of-five finals, the winner of which would take $32,000, while the next best was allotted $16,000. Let us fast-forward things a bit. Greenidge and Richards took West Indies to 216 in the first final at MCG before Australia collapsed to 130. The pair were at it again, along with Haynes, in the second final, also at MCG. West Indies scored 225 for 9, the fast bowlers strangled the Australians, and Gomes ran away with the spoils. Australia were bowled out for 107. Australia pulled one back at SCG: the hostsreached 214, andLloyd was the only one who resisted during the chase. A 56-run win kept Australia in the hunt. In the fourth final, at the same ground, Greenidge and Richards (again) got going; West Indies finished on 234 for 6 before restricting Australia to 216 for 9. With 10 wins in 14 matches in the tournament, West Indies were the deserving champions. Brief scores: West Indies 189 in 50 overs (Viv Richards 64; Len Pascoe 3 for 44) lost to Australia 168 for 7 in 43.1 overs (Andy Roberts 3 for 15) by 5 runs (revised target). Man of the Match: Andy Roberts. (Abhishek Mukherjee is the Chief Editor at CricketCountry and CricLife. He blogs here and can be followed on Twitter here.)