COMMISSIONER: Mr Fitzgerald, I think your witness is probably next in line.

MR FITZGERALD: Indeed, My Lord. The next witness is Mr Kallis, but I notice that the TV cameras are still here, so may they be cleared?

COMMISSIONER: Please excuse yourselves, gentlemen.

COMMISSIONER: Are you quite finished, Mr Fitzgerald?

MR FITZGERALD: Almost, Mr Commissioner.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Kallis. You and I saw each other at the gym at the Sports Science Institute yesterday afternoon, didn't we, and the thought occurred to me were you getting fit for the Sri Lankan tour or for this Commission, or for both?

Right, Mr Kallis, I'll swear you in. What are your full names?

MR KALLIS: Jaques Henry Kallis.

COMMISSIONER: Jaques Henry Kallis. Don't forget to press the button when you answer me.

JAQUES HENRY KALLIS: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr Commissioner. Mr Kallis, you learnt your cricket at Wynberg Boy's High School. Is that correct?

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: You subsequently played for Western Province.

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: And you first represented South Africa during the 1995/1996 season, when I think you were approximately 20 years of age.

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: You've since regularly represented South Africa?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: And you are a member inter alia of the South African team, which participated in the World Cup Competitions in 1996 and 1999.

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: There's going to be evidence in due course of Dave Richardson's batting average, so can I just confirm that your highest test score was 148 not out against New Zealand?

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: That's in a test match.

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: And your highest one-day international is 113.

MR KALLIS: I think that's correct, ja.

MR FITZGERALD: You were not a member of the South Africa team that toured India in 1996.

MR KALLIS: No. I had a stress fracture at the time, I think.

MR FITZGERALD: There's been reference in the Commission to Hamied Cassim.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: Is he known to you?

MR KALLIS: Yes, purely on a - sort of a name basis. I don't know him that well.

MR FITZGERALD: You've never given him tickets or anything else?

MR KALLIS: No, never.

MR FITZGERALD: Can we turn now to the Indian tour of earlier this year?

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: You were a member of the South African team?

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR FITZGERALD: At any stage in that tour was any approach made to you by anybody with regard to match-fixing or anything of that nature?

MR KALLIS: Only Hansie Cronje.

MR FITZGERALD: When was that?

MR KALLIS: It was before the second test match, I think it was in Bangalore, where Hansie came into the room, I think Mark and myself were in the room, and he said that he'd been approached and if we were interested in - you know, setting-up a game, or match-fixing a game, and you know we immediately turned to him and said, "no, we're not interested", and basically for a little more harsh words told him to get lost.

MR FITZGERALD: Is it correct that Lance Klusener was also in the room with you at the time?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: So this suggestion was put to you, Mark Boucher and Lance Klusener by Hansie Cronje?

MR KALLIS: That's correct. He actually walked into the room and did it in a totally joking way. You know, we immediately at the time thought it was just another one of his practical jokes, because he - I mean, he basically took over as the team joker once Fanie de Villiers had retired, so we thought it was just another one of his jokes.

MR FITZGERALD: With the benefit of hindsight, do you think he might have been serious at the time?

MR KALLIS: I think if I had to say with the benefit of hindsight, ja, I think probably it could have been his way of approaching us. Ja, it could have been, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: Now we all know that on the 7^th of April of this year the revelations broke. Were you in Durban at about the 10^th of April, preparing for the first one-day international against Australia?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: Is it correct that there was a team meeting called on, I think, Monday the 10^th after the team practice?

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR FITZGERALD: Can you describe to the Commissioner what happened at that team meeting?

MR KALLIS: Well basically, you know obviously all the news had come out about Hansie Cronje match-fixing and that sort of stuff, so we decided to have a meeting and get it out in the open, and just to basically, because we had an important series coming up, settle the dust and get the truth out, and Hansie Cronje at that meeting said to us he doesn't know where any of the information comes from. He has never been approached, he's not guilty of taking any money or anything of that sort. And you know, we basically took his word for it. And the meeting was ended. The guys said, "we back you, we believe you", and that was it.

MR FITZGERALD: On Tuesday the 11^th prior to your practice, a further team meeting was called. Is that correct?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: Now during the course of that night, Hansie had confessed that he hadn't been entirely honest.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: What was your response to this revelation?

MR KALLIS: When we woke up the next morning, we were absolutely shattered - well, I was absolutely shattered. I couldn't believe it, totally shocked. You know, he's the last person in the world that I thought would do such a thing.

MR FITZGERALD: Was it at that team meeting that Goolam Rajah informed the team of Mr Cronje's confession, as it were?

MR KALLIS: That's correct. He informed us that, I think it was about 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning, that Hansie had confessed to all the match fixing allegations.

MR FITZGERALD: Now later that day I understand a further team meeting was held at the players team room at you Durban hotel.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: Is it correct Dr Bacher, Percy Sonn, Bronwyn Wilkinson and others were also present at that meeting?

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR FITZGERALD: Do you remember what was disclosed at that meeting?

MR KALLIS: Yes. Dr Bacher came to us and he - well, it was basically said that Hansie had confessed to him that he was guilty, and that he'd stepped down as Captain and that Shaun Pollock had taken over the Captaincy and Mark Boucher would be the Vice Captain.

MR FITZGERALD: At that meeting were the players asked whether any of them had been involved in any underhand conduct?

MR KALLIS: That's correct. I think he went round the room and asked each individual whether they had any involvement in it, and most of the guys said, "no". In fact, I think all the guys said, "no".

MR FITZGERALD: Now we know as a fact that you had been approached by Mr Cronje in India. Why did you not disclose that to the meeting?

MR KALLIS: Basically, like I said before, you know he walked into our room in an absolutely joking manner, and we thought nothing of it. Thought it was another one of his practical jokes, didn't think anything of it right even up until that meeting, we weren't aware that we were even approached. You know, basically didn't think anything of it.

MR FITZGERALD: After the meeting, did you have any discussions with Mark Boucher?

MR KALLIS: Yeah, for some reason we just started discussing it, and said, "do you remember actually Hansie coming into the room?". I think we had pasta, and a whole lot of guys came into the room, and we suddenly said, "well, maybe it was his way of approaching us. We should get it out in the open, just in case there is anything in it. Just to make sure that we're being open and honest to the UCB." Mark then went to Goolam Rajah and told him basically how Hansie had approached us and what he'd said.

MR FITZGERALD: Can we just move on? There's been much reference to the Centurion Park declarations, and the test against England.

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: You were a member of the South African team in that test?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR FITZGERALD: And what was your personal response to the decision to make a game of it?

MR KALLIS: Yeah, we'd lost I think it was three days' play. We had a little bit of play on the first day, I think it was, and you know there was nothing in the game, and we were two nil up in the series, and Hansie came to us and said that he's got - how he wants to work out a deal with Nasser Hussein, and that they want to - I think we had to declare, then England would forfeit their innings, and we would forfeit our second innings and they would chase a target. And I didn't want anything to do with it. I've been playing test cricket for quite a while now, and I know how difficult it is to win a test match, and you don't give stuff like that away. So I was totally against it, as were most of the other guys. You know, we had a one-day series coming up, and the last thing we wanted to do was give England some confidence for that one-day series.

MR FITZGERALD: After the game what was your response to the fact that - the players response?

MR KALLIS: Ja, I was obviously very upset, I think as were most of the players. We don't like losing to the English at any time, let alone when it's been contrived like that. So we were very disappointed, especially seeing that we'd actually played some good cricket throughout the series, to give them a test match like that - we were very disappointed. A few of us - or a few of the guys left and went back to the hotel, and a few of us stayed behind afterwards. They've got a bath in the back there where the guys had a few beers afterwards, and Hansie was there as well, and I mean, he was as disappointed as we were. You know, he's not a very good loser, as are most of us, and he was also very disappointed.

MR FITZGERALD: Have you ever bet on a game of cricket?

MR KALLIS: No, never.

MR FITZGERALD: Are you aware of any other South African players that have done so?

MR KALLIS: No.

MR FITZGERALD: Other than you evidence with regard to the approach made to you by Hansie Cronje in India, have you ever been approached by any other person to throw a game?

MR KALLIS: Never.

MR FITZGERALD: No further questions, Mr Commissioner.

COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Fitzgerald. Mr Gauntlett.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR GAUNTLETT: Thank you, Mr Commissioner. Mr Kallis, to start at the back with the events after the Centurion match, in the bath at Centurion. Could you just expand a little bit on Mr Cronje's reaction, the kind of - or how he appeared emotionally and what views he expressed?

MR KALLIS: Ja, I think, he was obviously very disappointed as he usually is after a game, and we chatted about the game, perhaps where we went wrong, what we could have done differently. Pretty much as per normal as when we'd ever lost a game.

MR GAUNTLETT: And it seemed to you that he was genuinely disappointed and would have liked matters to have gone otherwise?

MR KALLIS: Yeah, it certainly appeared that way. Definitely, yes.

MR GAUNTLETT: Now reverting to the evening of the pasta and the approach which you've described there, you know what I'm referring to, the 2000 tour in India. Could you just expand, you indicated in your oral evidence that when he came in, in your statement you described him as Cronje coming in with a wide grin on his face and making this proposal. You said something in your oral evidence about some form of harsh words that you indicated to him to get lost. Did you speak or who reacted in this way?

MR KALLIS: I think we all, Mark, myself and I think Lance, we all pretty much said it in the same way. You know, just seeing it as one of his jokes, and told him basically, "ag, get lost", and that's where it ended. Nothing was ever mentioned again.

MR GAUNTLETT: Did he linger after that in the room?

MR KALLIS: I think he ate his pasta, or took his pasta. I can't quite remember, you know, I don't recall if he stayed after. I think he stayed for a little while afterwards, basically he ate his pasta. But I can't specifically remember that.

MR GAUNTLETT: But he then removed himself, and you, Klusener and Boucher stayed on in the room?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, ja.

MR GAUNTLETT: Mr Kallis, when the news of Mr Cronje's initial revelations was communicated to you at the team meeting on Tuesday the 11^th of April, you say in your written statement:

What are you talking about? Were some of the members of the team in tears, or on the brink of tears?

MR KALLIS: Yeah, there were a few guys that were very upset. Obviously we'd grown very close to Hansie, and we just couldn't believe it. The guys were shattered, and practice is actually made voluntarily, and I think we actually delayed practice by a little while. So certainly, there were a few guys that were very upset. It took a while before the guys could practice, and I think everyone ended up practising.

MR GAUNTLETT: Mr Boje described how he felt affected and I think sat out the practice, or part of the practice. Do you recall that happening? Did you see what Mr Boje was doing?

MR KALLIS: No, I don't recall that, no.

MR GAUNTLETT: Thank you, Mr Commissioner.

COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Gauntlett. Ms Batohi.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BATOHI: Thank you. Mr Kallis, looking at your statement, page 7, paragraph 9.3, you state:

we are dealing with the Centurion match, you state that:

Can you just elaborate on that?

MR KALLIS: Yes, I think - well, it's difficult to remember, but I think it was round about 2.8 runs an over, if I remember, which the final target was, between 2.8 and 3 runs an over, and Centurion Park is a very quick out-field, the air is thin and then the ball does travel quite quickly, and it's generally a fast scoring ground. The wicket had turned out to be very flat. After the rain got onto it, it was very slow and very conducive for batting. At the time I didn't think that 3 runs an over was enough. I thought perhaps closer to 4 runs an over would be a better target.

MS BATOHI: You also state in paragraph 9.4, talking about Cronje, you say:

Can you elaborate on that?

MR KALLIS: I think you have to have a strong personality to captain the side. He's very - when he makes a decision he sticks by it. He's just very strong in whatever he does. He's strong in his beliefs, and he just came across as a person who really backed himself, and never sort of stood down to anyone.

MS BATOHI: I'm just trying to get some sort of feel of the sort of Captain that he was. From what you say, does that mean that he was not particularly open to opposing views or suggestions about things? He was - well, can you just comment on that?

MR KALLIS: I think he did listen to the guys. He was always open to listen to suggestions and that, and always accepted advice. And then he made the decision himself, but he definitely was the type of Captain that listened to his team-mates. It was very important to him - winning was very important to him, and what his team mates thought as well, but at the end of the day, being the Captain, and being such a good Captain that he was, he listened to his team-mates, but that the end of the day it was up to him to make the decision.

MS BATOHI: You say "winning was very important to him", so if one bears that in mind, you must just therefore find it quite strange that he gave, in your view, England such an easy target at Centurion.

MR KALLIS: Ja, I think so. That's why a lot of the guys were very upset. We didn't want to give England any chance, we didn't really want to make a game of it. And then to make it quite that easy, we were quite shocked that he would set such an easy target.

MS BATOHI: You said that he was - you know, he'd always talk to the other players and hear their point of view, but at the end of the day, more often than not, did his viewpoint prevail, or was he prepared to change his viewpoint? Generally, what sort of person was he?

MR KALLIS: I think if you came up with a valid point and he saw it from your point of view, I think he probably would change. But I would say most of the time he backed his decision. But like I said, if you did come up with a very good, valid point he would listen to you and give it a try.

MS BATOHI: Thank you. I have no further questions.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Dickerson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DICKERSON: Thank you, Mr Commissioner. Mr Kallis, the Centurion Park test, you must correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that the evidence given yesterday was that the target set for the England side was 240 in 70 overs. Does that seem correct to you?

MR KALLIS: Ja, I think it was round about 3, just over 3 runs an over, ja.

MR DICKERSON: And in a case where there is a forfeit by the two sides of an innings, such as happened at Centurion Park, the question of the target to be set is a matter which is discussed and agreed between the two sides. Is that correct?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR DICKERSON: And it's obviously a question of negotiation. Once the decision has been made in principle to try and save the game by a forfeit, the English would obviously have pressed for what they regarded as an achievable target, and South Africa on the other hand, would have striven for the largest target.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR DICKERSON: It's a matter of compromise.

MR KALLIS: Correct, ja.

MR DICKERSON: With the benefit of hindsight, we of course know that the target which was set was not enough because we lost.

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR DICKERSON: At the time, however, it wasn't that clear because we came very close to winning.

MR KALLIS: Yes, that's right.

MR DICKERSON: And in fact, had it not been for the injury to Paul Adams during play on that day, it is very likely that the test would have been won.

MR KALLIS: Ja, it's a difficult one to call because the wicket wasn't really turning too much. But Paul being a fantastic bowler, you know we probably would have had a much better chance of winning it, yes.

MR DICKERSON: And even without him you came, to use the words of Lance Klusener, "within a whisker".

MR KALLIS: That's correct. We were fortunate to have a good enough bowling attack to withstand the injury of Paul, and to come very close to winning the test match. I think we lost by one wicket, I think it was.

MR DICKERSON: Are you aware that during the rain interruption some time before he decision to forfeit an innings, there had been a meeting attended inter alia by Mr Harrison from the Northern Titans, Dr Bacher, the Umpires, the Match Umpire - the Match Referee, I beg your pardon, and the Captains, at which there was discussion of whether or not to convert the test match into a one-day international?

MR KALLIS: Yes, we'd heard some talk about it the day before. And we discussed it between a few of the guys, that's correct, yes.

MR DICKERSON: And are you aware that there was some pressure to turn it into a one-day game in order to try and save, amongst other things, the spectacle and to generate a larger gate?

MR KALLIS: Ja, I think we had to try and do something because Northern Transvaal had lost a lot of money I think two - or a few years before because of the same situation, so I think it was pretty obvious that they were under pressure, and tried to get the crowd back in. You know, that's why I think they discussed perhaps having a one-day game.

MR DICKERSON: Are you aware that the conversion to a one-day game turned out to be impossible because of a conflict between the sponsors for the one-day series and the sponsors for the test match series.

MR KALLIS: Yeah, we actually thought that the day before, that there might be one or two reasons why we couldn't do it, and that obviously being one of them, ja.

MR DICKERSON: And if the match could not be converted into a one-day international to save the spectacle and to generate takings at the gate, the forfeiture of an innings was an obvious solution.

MR KALLIS: Ja, that was a definite solution. If you weren't going to play a one-day game. Yeah, sure.

MR DICKERSON: And in fact the declaration did save the game as a spectacle, and it did generate a substantial crowd.

MR KALLIS: Yes, that's correct. I think the people, once they'd realised that there was game, they actually came in and it turned out to be probably one of the most exciting test matches I've played in.

MR DICKERSON: And apart from the financial rewards that were reaped by the Northern Titans as a result of the crowd, there was considerable public and cricketing acclaim for the decision that had been taken.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

MR DICKERSON: I have no further questions.

COMMISSIONER: Just before you re-examine, Mr Fitzgerald. Mr Kallis, the team were unhappy at the suggestion that this should be converted into the last day of the fifth - fifth test, was it?

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

COMMISSIONER: Did the team or members of the team express their unhappiness or dissatisfaction to the Captain?

MR KALLIS: Yes. We had a meeting and a lot of the guys said to him - I recall going to him and saying, "I'm not happy with not making a game of it".

COMMISSIONER: What was his response? How did he respond?

MR KALLIS: He seemed quite adamant that he wanted to make a game of it. He listened to the guys, but at the end of the day, said, no, he wanted to make a game of it, rather than having a boring day's cricket.

COMMISSIONER: (microphone not on)

MR KALLIS: Ja, so he was adamant that he wanted to have a game on the hands, rather than having a boring day's cricket, even though the guys weren't too happy with him doing it.

COMMISSIONER: A one-day game why would that have necessarily have been a boring day's cricket? One-day cricket is generally not regarded as boring.

MR KALLIS: Ja, sorry. I think there was a misunderstanding. I think if we hadn't of forfeited innings' and that, the last day would have petered out. We would have probably batted 'til after lunch, and England would have just batted out the day. If we just played without forfeiting innnings', so that's where the boring part would have come in.

COMMISSIONER: The possibility of just having a separate one-day game, was that discussed?

MR KALLIS: Yes, we discussed it amongst the team and tried to weigh up the options. But at the end of the day, you've got guys batting averages, bowling averages, wickets to be taken and test runs to be scored, which at the end of the day is the ultimate test. So we would have had to forfeit those as well, which the guys did think about. But we definitely discussed it, ja.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Kallis, would you agree with me that what was finally contrived was, to all intents and purposes, a one-day game? The only difference really was that it produced a result of the test match.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, yes.

COMMISSIONER: A result, which nobody in his right mind I would have thought could ever have anticipated, having regard to the fact that there were three days during which -the second, third and fourth day of the game was washed out.

MR KALLIS: That's correct, ja.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Fitzgerald.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR FITZGERALD: What I omitted to do, you have a signed statement in front of you, do you?

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR FITZGERALD: And you confirm that contents of that statement?

MR KALLIS: Yes.

MR FITZGERALD: Perhaps it can be handed up.

COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Fitzgerald, now I can read it. Thank you, Mr Kallis.

MR DICKERSON: Mr Commissioner, if I may.

MR FITZGERALD: I haven't finished, Mr Dickerson.

MR DICKERSON: I beg your pardon.

MR FITZGERALD: Just one final thing, Mr Kallis, is it correct that on the most recent tour to India South Africa in fact won both test matches?

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR DICKERSON: That was the first side to win a test series in India for a long time.

MR KALLIS: That's correct.

MR FITZGERALD: Thank you.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Dickerson.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DICKERSON: Thank you, Mr Commissioner. If I may just address one aspect. There appears to have been some confusion. We thought it had been addressed in this witnesses and earlier evidence, it arises from the questions that were put by the Commission.

Mr Kallis, the question of the one-day conversion of the Centurion test into a one-day international was discussed. It was impossible, because there was a clash of sponsors. Is that correct?

MR KALLIS: I'm unaware of what Dr Bacher and that said, but we discussed it the day before, and we said that there might be a problem. amongst the guys they had said there might be a problem with regard to sponsors.

MR DICKERSON: And I put it to you that the reason why the question of a declaration then arose, as opposed to the conversion to a one-day international was because the sponsors, and the clash of sponsors, made it impossible to convert to a different type of game, namely, a one-day international.

MR KALLIS: Yeah, it seems that way. But I do recall, I think it was Dr Bacher, saying that it wouldn't be regarded as an international. It would be a friendly, I think, and it wouldn't count for the stats in the one-day game.

MR DICKERSON: I have no further questions.

COMMISSIONER: Anything arising out of Mr Dickerson's last set of questions? Mr Fitzgerald?

MR FITZGERALD: No, Mr Commissioner.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Kallis, thank you very much for your assistance.

MR KALLIS: Thanks very much.