Dear Editor,
I refer to an article appearing in SN on February 19, captioned ‘GFA was suspended because Mendonca, Cole criticized Klass’ by Iva Wharton. Apart from being commendable, the article in question offered a meaningful insight into the dictatorial policies that were previously foisted upon the GFA by former GFF President, Mr Colin Klass. That he was blindly assisted by the entire General Council membership, lends credence to the notion of “toothless poodles.” But realistically speaking, apart from President Alfred King, the Referees Council and to a lesser extent former GFF Treasurer Alfred King, no one would have spared a second thought that both Mendonca and Cole were right in their disclosures. Neither would they have asked Mr Klass why he attempted to unceremoniously leave the hotel in Trinidad without addressing the collective concerns of the national players, who subsequently had to confront him in the wee hours of the morning in the hotel lobby. It was because of that action by Mr Klass, that Mr Mendonca had called for his resignation, since as a former national player Mendonca had experienced poor conditions, ie, substandard meals.
Finally, at a subsequent executive meeting of the GFA, I, as the former Asst Secretary/Treasurer, was mandated to address the purported suspension of the GFA. And my take on it was that the views of both individuals, despite the fact that these were expressed publicly, had nevertheless been given in their private capacities and were definitely not reflective of the GFA executive‘s will. At no point of time in any executive meeting was Mr Klass’ resignation ever tabled for discussion, and neither, therefore, was it ever recorded in any minutes. Further, as I had subsequently indicated to Mr Klass, any apology from both individuals ought not to be accepted on a GFA letterhead. It must be noted that the relevant information was conveyed to all executive members, with no objections. And as pointed out by the present GFA Secretary, Mr Christopher Matthias, how could Klass as the accused proceed to chair a meeting, and seek the support of those present to suspend the GFA, when in actuality the matter on hand was his resignation? Definitely, he should have withdrawn himself from any deliberation. Moreover, with two Vice-Presidents present the first should have taken the chair.
Yours faithfully,
Lester Sealey
