Non-Cricketing Reasons

[Ernest]

West Indies 93/2 (23.2 ov).

Not that bad a score.

[Ninjaman]

Occasional Fan,

You may have discussed this earlier in the year, but you must have forgotten that Lara was invited to accept a position in the First Test squad.

He chose not to.

If he had, then he would be playing right now with his contract.

Digicel could have paid ten billion pounds, but they did not pay for the individual image rights of the players.

They paid to sponsor the WI team.

That is all.

I guess you have not seen footballers have sponsorship deals with one clothes manufaturer but play on a club team with a different sponsor and a national team with a third sponsor?

Whether or not you would be happy for that to happen, is of course, a totally different point.

I doubt the ECB or ACB would sign a contract that would exclude the better players with pre-existing contracts (as the personal contracts were) from being picked.

Digicel have bought the WI rights for US$20M over 5 years for both home and away series.

C&W, whilst I have no love for them either, offered the same US$20M over 3 years for JUST home series.

When the board went back to C&W, it asked them to match an offer of US$29.5M in order to get the sponsorship.

Where did that offer come from??

It should be clear that either they were trying to shaft C&W or some sweeteners to accept Digicel's offer were thrown in.

So I repeat, Lara was not out because of his contract, he was invited and chose not to play to support his other players.

He has always, Digicel or not, been available.

The WICB always knew this and the fact they waited until 24 hrs before the squad was announced to put Lara's back against the wall is just another reason to highlight their incompetence.

Faced with WI cricket going into oblivion, believe me US$20M over 5 years from other entities or persons can EASILY be found in the region.

If the board lost the Digicel contract, it is the board that would go bacnkrupt, not WI cricket.

The board is a privately run company registered in Tortola, BVI. Incidentally not a Test playing or CARICOM country.

That is why no one can force them to show their accounts and be scrutinised.

In fact, if they went bankrupt and the government's got the chance to run WI cricket, it might be the best thing.

[Occasional Fan]

Ninjaman - don't get me wrong, please. I am not trying to argue with any of the points you make - the WICB doesn't get as much air time in these parts as it certainly would in the Caribbean, but what little it has had in recent months hasn't covered it in glory. I'm not trying to defend their action in any way, but I do stand by the points I made above: economics are part and parcel of professional sport nowadays and the sponsors, rightly or wrongly, wield a lot of clout. It would not at all surprise me if Digicel is holding the WICB to ransom on this matter (though it would of course only work if their sponsorship could not easily be replaced elsewhere: your comment that the cash is easily available elsewhere throws some question on that assumption, to be sure).

You make another comment which slightly concerns me - but only because of my professional background as an auditor who therefore has some unnatural suspicion of certain financial matters. If C&W offered $20m for three years' worth of home cricket, and Digicel offered the same amount for five years of home and away cricket, how did Digicel win? On the face of it, they have got more cricket for the same money (or, looking at it another way, the WICB has foregone the opportunity to raise money from other sources for away cricket and for the two additional years). In my auditing days, this would have had me digging around furiously looking for reasons. I guess in the BVI there are no audit requirements for private companies? Does anyone have a way to encourage some transparency on the part of the WICB?

One last point: I really would not agree with your suggestion to put the administration of WI cricket into government hands. Sponsors might be bad enough, but government interference surely cannot be desirable (consider the present controversies from Zimbabwe, for example, as well as previous controversies relating to English cricket in the days of the South African boycotts). Add to that the issue of having numerous independent governments in the WI cricket area, and it would be a recipe for chaos, wouldn't it?

[Ninjaman]

O Fan, I'm sorry, if you felt like I was "arguing" with you I apologise.

Just that this whole thing irks me.

Ninjaman - don't get me wrong, please. I am not trying to argue with any of the points you make - the WICB doesn't get as much air time in these parts as it certainly would in the Caribbean, but what little it has had in recent months hasn't covered it in glory. I'm not trying to defend their action in any way, but I do stand by the points I made above: economics are part and parcel of professional sport nowadays and the sponsors, rightly or wrongly, wield a lot of clout. It would not at all surprise me if Digicel is holding the WICB to ransom on this matter (though it would of course only work if their sponsorship could not easily be replaced elsewhere: your comment that the cash is easily available elsewhere throws some question on that assumption, to be sure).

Digicel holding the WICB to ransom??

Now you have it, my friend.

Don't get me wrong. I understand Digicel is a business looking out for #1. My problem is not for them. As such they are going to take whatever they can get. I understand the practical realities of how they would see things.

My problem is the board, mate.

When I say the money is easily available I mean if Digicel walked away and the board was left bankrupt, WI cricket would not die.

Just the board would. And it is a private financial company. No governments or people would suffer. So some other company or conglomerate would step in to help them or CARICOM would reconvene another board to run WI cricket.

The tourism, cricket helps bring in is too valuable to lose amongst other things.

The board has lost something over US$16M over the last 5 fiscal years. How? Only ***** and his 12 merry men know!!

I suspect Digicel know that the board can't buy its way out of this contract and is pretty much bent over and taking it up the jacksie!! Hence where your ideas come to fruition.

No public money is used to bail out the board.

You make another comment which slightly concerns me - but only because of my professional background as an auditor who therefore has some unnatural suspicion of certain financial matters. If C&W offered $20m for three years' worth of home cricket, and Digicel offered the same amount for five years of home and away cricket, how did Digicel win? On the face of it, they have got more cricket for the same money (or, looking at it another way, the WICB has foregone the opportunity to raise money from other sources for away cricket and for the two additional years). In my auditing days, this would have had me digging around furiously looking for reasons. I guess in the BVI there are no audit requirements for private companies? Does anyone have a way to encourage some transparency on the part of the WICB?

I thought the same thing the first time I saw it.

I think a child would work that out.

Same money over shorter period for half the product = More per year with whatever you get for overseas tours as a bonus.

Now bearing that in mind, the question you ask is so true. How did they win??

I offer no answers lest I, you or the messageboard be sued.

I won't go a level past incompetent without proof, if you get me.

Worse still to then try and get C&W to match US$29.5M when it might not have even existed!!!

[b]One last point: I really would not agree with your suggestion to put the administration of WI cricket into government hands. Sponsors might be bad enough, but government interference surely cannot be desirable (consider the present controversies from Zimbabwe, for example, as well as previous controversies relating to English cricket in the days of the South African boycotts). Add to that the issue of having numerous independent governments in the WI cricket area, and it would be a recipe for chaos, wouldn't it?

Not run by the government.

But a new board, independent of the old with a clean slate with all the countries represented.

Given a boost by the governments and then left to get on with it.

By governments I mean CARICOM which is the only body of clout that covers the region of WI cricket.

----

Did you know back at the height of WI cricket, the day to day board running consisted of just the President and a secretary.

Check out www.windiescricket.com and see the host of people now on the board drawing a wage.

Check out how poor the site is and then wonder what the website manager is doing or getting paid for.

How much WI memorabilia have you ever seen?
How much tapes or books about past and present WI greats can you buy?

Then think what the merchandising manager is doing or getting paid for.

If it wasn't serious and close to my heart I'd laugh.

And consider that during our darkest hour, we have had a player like Lara who can score over 10,000 runs and break records etc... and he faces the media when they lose and has to take it on the chin time and time again to the point where he is blamed for all manner of things out of his control.

Yet hardly any words are mentioned of the board's failings.

And the moment they got the chance, they dropped him for the proverbial 30 pieces and worse still, a sizeable amount of people go along with it or support it.

Anyway, Pagon just got out.

Let me see Tiger come to the crease

[Occasional Fan]

Ninja - when I was in Barbados last year, the Board was coming in for some criticism in the papers even then. As I say above, I don't see all that much coverage over here, but what I do see seems to be relentlessly negative. How do you see things developing over the coming months and years? As an outsider, it seems to me that WI cricket is going through a bad time just now, and that is not only bad for WI - it's bad for the game. The world game needs WI cricket back at the top of its form (with respect to our Aussie contributors, it can't IMO be good for the game in the long run to have only the Aussies at the top for decades on end: competition is needed). So - how do you see the WI renaissance happening?

[Ninjaman]

I don't see a rennaissance happening anytime soon.

I don't believe those in administration fully understand WHY it is we have declined or even WHy we were ever good in the first place.

At youth level, we have good players and not just at cricket either.

When I was a youngster at high school, I would play cricket and football vs visiting teams. Invariably we would win at ages 11-14 or so. By the time we got to 17-19, and in cases where we actually played more or less the same players again, they had surpassed us.

In general, they had received proper coaching and understood many of the basics. We just had a "street" ability in us which made us look more attractive.

Sound familiar? There are many WI batsmen now who will never average more than 25 in their career, but it will be the most dashing 25 average career ever!!

From the 1950s up to our best side of the 1980s, the better players and close to all of them, had an avenue of either county or league cricket in England to hone their skills.

In fact, for the 1994 County season, I believe 13 of the 18 counties had a WI as their overseas.

Also, they learnt the art of being a PROFESSIONAL there.

Our players now have nothing to aid the bridge from youth player to professional player.

The WI players are not centrally contracted and only paid tour by tour, so if you get dropped or injured, then you are gonna have to do some other work which eats into time to develop your cricket etc....

The avenue of cricket in England is either closed or barely there for reasons that are quite easy to understand. WI players are not good enough but also, nowadays, we play cricket up to July which is unheard of before now.

In fact, SA start their tour today. Historically, they should be close to the END of the tour.

In addition, our own domestic level has dropped and sub-standard pitches are prepared.

25 years ago, a Barbados vs Jamaica game was as close to Test match quality as FC cricket has ever been, now it is at a low level.

It all comes down to finance and we just don't have it.

We have no A team or B team anymore. Scrapped by the board. Ho hum.

We allegedly have an academy that needs funds. Surprise surprise!

The whole structure of how a player moves from good schoolboy to top line Test player is shot.

And what makes it worse is those in power are still stuck in running our cricket as if it is 1955 not 2005.

So let us say you are a good player as a schoolboy like Wavell Hinds was.

You do 6th form and stay on until 19 yrs at school. You are a top performer at under-19 level for WI.

Unless you get time of from work to concentrate on cricket, if you are seriously lucky, then cricket is secondary to earning a living.

Then if you still can persevere, you might make it for Jamaica or Barbados and play regional cricket. The standard is low (the side that came bottom of English County Div 2 could win) that you will either fall to that level of mediocrity or become a flat track bully. Or if you are a decnt bowler, your wicket hauls and average will look so good that they will hide the truth.

As soon as you reach the Test level, you will have to learn to swim fast to survive.

Look at Gayle and Sarwan. They are survivors and it was only last year they averaged over 50 in Tests and their averages started to properly go north. Both are around 25 with 50 tests.

They spent about 20-25 of those Tests learning.

Not too long ago, I checked Sarwan's stats vs Michael Vaughn's. Sarwan, if you included his Tests and FC games with WI, had played a similar number of games that Vaughn had played BEFORE his debut.

One should check just how much cricket the likes of Viv, Lloyd and Greenidge had to play and what they had to prove before they got into the WI side.

Anyway, I have to go run an errand.

Peace out.

[Zainub]

Originally Posted by OF

Such an arrangement would be very difficult to enforce. We spend half our time here arguing about the appropriate selections for England's test matches and we never agree. Why should we expect the ICC to be able to determine impartially whether any country has fielded its strongest team?

Of coarse OF. People will always differ over what a country's best eleven is, I'm not saying the ICC should hand pick what it thinks are other counties' best sides, but I am nevertheless saying it should do more to avoid the sitautions we have been witnessing of late in Zimbabwe and the West Indies (and to lesser extent SA) where as ff said 'non-cricketing' reasons led the to the fielding of an under strength side. There is difference between the two. I'm not asking for new regulations, there are plenty of them that exist already, I'm only asking for the ICC to be more proactive and reactive.

[Maranello]

I am not really sure what we expect the ICC to do? What sanctions can they impose, other than cancelling the series all together if weak teams are fielded? And if that happens, I am sure there will be legal action by the TV companies, the local authorities, etc and the ICC could well eld up financially liable, seems pointless.

I'd much rather have cricket involving South Africa, West Indies and Zimbabwe, even if one or two "stars" do not play, then no cricket at all. Because that is the only route open to the ICC; they cannot force the WICB to select anyone, since the ICC is not the WI selection committee; all they could potentially do, is say that they series will not be recognised as official Tests if so and so does not play.

Quite apart from the logistical difficulties involved in getting all the other ICC member countries to vote on, and approve such a severe sanction, and notwithstanding the strong legal challenges which will undoubtedly follow, I fear that this will be a very slipper slope indeed. So when Australia unceremoniously axed Steve Waugh before the 2003 World Cup, should the ICC have threatened them with expulsion if they refused to select him, since he was obviously still a great captain and a very effective batsman? When Pakistan dropped Wasim, Waqar and Saeed after WC 2003, all three are Pakistani greats, and all three were still better than many of their replacements, should the ICC have told PCB: select them back, or we shall not recognise your games as full internationals? One could argue quite reasonably that many of these people were axed for non-cricketing reasons; people often are in Pakistan! What about Rashid Latif? Whenever he has been forced to leave, it has been due to non-cricketing reasons, and at each of those occasions, he was generally our best w/k. Should the ICC have intervened on each of these occasions too?

Where does one draw the line? If the ICC does have a policy to intervene, this needs to be uniformly applied, not just to South Africa, the West Indies and Zimbabwe, but also to England, Australia, India and Pakistan. This "proactive" policy then needs to be rigourously enforced and followed-through, with a Directorate to police team selections for each international. Do we really want that? The truth is that the ICC has no business intervening in the local selection matters of any of its members, be it Zimbabwe, South Africa or the West Indies. It administers the game globally, no more, no less. It does not have any legal jurisdiction, and nor does it have a right, let alone a moral obligation, to intervene.

If someone feels Test cricket is being "devalued" to let these three countries play, they should use their TV remote and switch over to a different sport. I personally would much rather watch and follow Test cricket with one or two "stars" not present, then not have any Test cricket at all.

[Occasional Fan]

That goes a stage further than my comment, Maranello: I said it would be difficult to enforce a rule requiring teams to select their best; you have taken it on to the sanction stage. But you're right. There's no workable role in this for the ICC as far as I can see.

[Zainub]

Only a fool can disagree with what M has said, it is plain logic and a matter of common sense that the ICC cannot intervene in issues of selection, but I'm sure they can at least apply more pressure on national boards and players' assocaitions in the case of contractual disputes like the one in West Indies (and beaware there is one surfing around in Australia as well)?

As the political jib jab and exchange of statements has continued in the Carribean (with the players' union saying the axed 7 players received death threats and the board responding to say that is non sense) ...the west indiam team continues to play on without some of its most important members, it is still no certainity when those players will return.

And what is our lovely ICC doing? Nothing. At least Ehsan Mani could have gone down to Bridgetown and help to try and force a negociation. He should have done that long ago in my opinion but he's probably busy attending high profile lunches in Mumbai, trying to get tex exxemtions for the next icc champions trophy. This situation in the Carribean has been around for a while, and the ICC should have intervened long ago IMHO. But it has done nothing but watch.