Looking at three possible sports crimes of intent

OPINION: If all's fair in love and war, what about sport?

Three high-profile cases of "sporting manipulation" or simply put, cheating, have recently rocked the sports world.

The Harlequins rugby "Bloodgate" saga, Renault's pre-planned accident at last year's Singapore Formula One GP, and allegations that the New Zealand bowls four threw a match on purpose to put themselves in a better position for the play-offs have cast shadows over the fair-play charter of international sport.

In all three cases, those involved were accused of bending the rules to their advantage by using underhand means.

The bowlers, in particular skip Gary Lawson, copped some bad press for what would have been a pretty logical effort to improve their chances of winning the tournament, the recent Asia Pacific champs in Kuala Lumpur.

It is alleged they threw their last pool match, against Thailand, in order to avoid meeting arch rivals Australia in the play-offs. The kiwi bowlers had already qualified.

Lawson, who has never been far from controversy during his illustrious career, denies the allegations and the investigation is ongoing, but one wonders what the fuss is about.

The danger of a round-robin format is that some matches become meaningless as teams near the play-offs.

When the English cricket side played the Black Caps yesterday, they were already assured of a semifinal spot and went down meekly to the Kiwis – did anyone accuse them of chucking the match to allow the New Zealanders to get into the semis ahead of the dangerous, and more consistent, Sri Lankans?

I also recall Stephen Fleming doing something similar to deny the Aussies in a one-day cricket series.

In fact, the bowls furore seems a bit of a non-event.

The rugby case was more serious. It came about when a Harlequins player bit into a fake blood capsule enabling him to be replaced by a goalkicker at a crucial time in a match.

What might appear shocking and absurd to those outside the sport was revealed to be fairly common top-level practice and a desperate response to rugby's archiac replacement rules.

For years, injured players have tried to find signs of blood on their person so their enforced replacement could become temporary.

For his part in the conspiracy, former Harlequins director of rugby Dean Richards received a three-year ban from the sport, the physio was banned for two years and the club fined 258,000.

The F1 crash was infinitely more dangerous and had far-reaching implications for the sport.

At the Singapore GP the Renault team conspired with driver Nelson Piquet Jr to drive his car into a wall, bringing the safety car on to the track and allowing Piquet's team-mate Fernando Alonso to win the race.

Piquet admitted his part in the sordid conspiracy, earning himself immunity from punishment.

Team boss Flavio Briatore was banned indefinitely from any F1 activities and Renault engineering director Pat Symonds was suspended for five years – but both had already resigned following the disclosure of plans to stage the crash. Renault escaped with a suspended ban, meaning business as usual for the high-profile team.

Comparing the punishments for the latter transgressions is interesting. Richards cops a three-year ban for asking a player to swallow fake blood, Renault gets a suspended sentence for telling their driver to drive a speeding vehicle into a wall on purpose.

Both team bosses hoped to influence the course of their contest by foul means, but its hard to overlook the fact that the rugby rort is relatively minor compared with the F1 fiasco.