FICA Say No to Lie Detector Polygraph Test to Weed Out Match fixing, Corruption

Steve Waugh’s suggestion that the lie detector test or the polygraph is a good method to stem the rot of match fixing and corruption is not going well with the players’ body on several counts.

Steve Waugh

Steve Waugh, the former Australian captain and member of the Marylebone Cricket Committee (MCC), made the recommendation that the polygraph test would be a good way to discern those indulging in match fixing. He even went further and took the test himself before assessing that it was worth considering by the ICC after the spot fixing scandal involving Pakistan cricketers at Lord’s last year. However, it seems that this would be a radical move and as such, is already meeting with reservations from the players.

The FICA, the body of international cricketers that does not include cricketers from India or Pakistan, has already expressed its concerns if such a move were to indeed become effective. For one, Waugh had suggested that players voluntarily sign up to undergo the lie detector test to show that the sport is not reeking of malice. It was his opinion that that would go a long way in assuring the cricket loving public and vindicating their faith. However, that the cricketers would then have to be forthcoming to take the test of their accord was in question.

The FICA makes certain valid points because as mentioned previously, the polygraph test is not within its flaws, which basically means it is not one hundred reliable and that there is an element of doubt wherein the lie detector test may yield contrary result. In such a situation, any cricketer voluntarily himself to undergo the test could find his career needlessly under the scanner. There is also the danger of manipulating the lie detector test, which is one of the reasons why the polygraph test has not always been admissible in courts across countries simply because there are those who can tamper by manipulating their body’s vital signs. With that being the case, it would be hard a task to decide whether the lie detector test is the ICC’s best way of catching the few rotten eggs in the basket.

The ICC set up an Anti Corruption Unit although there is still a fair division amongst people over the role that the body has been able to provide as the spot fixing was the result of a sting operation by a tabloid and not the outcome of the ICC’s ACSU which brings into question whether the ICC is capable enough to be able to proactive to weed out corruption which seems not just limited to the cricketers alone.

The lie detector suffers on the count that the ICC cannot hold a player responsible for the result given the various factors which means essentially there is a case for an argument being made should the result be contrary to the truth. In that light, it is hard to see the cricketers submitting themselves, although the few players like Andrew Strauss who are amenable to the idea may not be so when they realize that even this system could see a few players going scot free while others may fail the lie detector test despite their character being above integrity. Unless it is failproof, it is a gamble for any cricketer.