Sarfraz was a key witness against the team

Former cricketers Sarfraz Nawaz and Majid Khan claimed the game was fixed.

They said the Pakistan team was "much superior" and could not understand why captain Wasim Akram chose to field first after winning the toss.

They also referred to fielding lapses by the Pakistan players which supported the match-fixing theory.

Players who gave evidence told the inquiry that the team had already qualified for the Super Sixes phase of the competition and had become "lax" because they considered Bangladesh to be a weak team.

Journalist Fareshteh Gati Aslam submitted a statement suggesting the match was fixed to compensate bookies who had lost heavily on the Pakistan v England final in Sharjah the previous month.

Abdul Waheed, another sports journalist, said that betting shops near the ground were giving high odds in favour of a Bangladesh win.

Report conclusion: "The testimony of Sarfraz Nawaz and Majid Khan is in fact an opinion. They did not profess any direct knowledge about the fixation of the match.

"Although they are former cricketers of repute and their analysis is entitled to respect, but in order to hold that the match was fixed and, therefore, to condemn the players, the Commission required incriminatory evidence, which is completely lacking.

"A finding of condemnation cannot justifiably be based on opinions. Similar is the case of the written statement of Mrs Fareshteh Gati Aslam."

Pakistan v India - 8 June 1999

Javagal Srinath bowls Pakistan's Abdur Razzaq

India scored 227 for six after winning the toss and Pakistan were then bowled out for 180. Again, Sarfraz and Majid gave evidence that they believed the game had been fixed.

Players who gave evidence said no Pakistani would ever "think of subverting his country" against India.

Report conclusion: "Unlike Bangladesh, India is a stronger side, which has produced some outstanding cricketers over the years. Both the teams have been winning and losing matches against each other.

Apart from opinion, there is no credible material on the file wherby this Commission can give a finding that this match was fixed in favour of India."

Match-fixing claims made to King Commission in South Africa by Ali Bacher

Bacher declined a number of invitations to travel to Pakistan to give evdience but sent a fax in January 2002, stating that he had disclosed all information to the International Cricket Council's Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU).

Lord Condon: Head of the Anti Corruption Unit

The inquiry asked the ACU for this evidence but only sent an article from Wisden in reply, which questioned the run out dismissals of Saeed Anwar and Azhar Mahmood against Bangladesh.

Report conclusion: "During its meeting with representatives of Anti-Corruption Unit at Sharjah, the Commission pointedly asked for material relevant to the subject but the answer was in the negative.

"The Commission also requested the Unit to contact Dr Ali Bacher and request him to transmnit the material/evidence to the Commission.

"This they promised, but apart from the photocopy of an article from 'Wisden', the Unit did not send any other material.

"The Commission, therefore, holds that it cannot be said with any mount of certitiude that the match was fixed."