Dear Editor,
The Georgetown Cricket Association (GCA) is responding to a letter from Mr Alfred Mentore that appeared in Stabroek News on November 5, 2012 with the headline ‘DCC concerned that system other than Duckworth-Lewis was used to pick winner of Queensway tournament.’
1. Please note that Mr Mentore has not written to the GCA officially seeking answers to any of his club’s concerns.
2. The game was scheduled to begin at 9.30 am and end at 5.15 pm which would have been good enough. Neither team raised a concern about the match timing during the pre-match meeting prior to the final.
3. In his letter Mr Mentore claimed that he was shocked at the revelation that a system other than the well-established Duckworth-Lewis was used to establish the winner. As they say. ‘If you want to hide something from some people, put it in writing.’ Revelation is defined in the dictionary as “Something revealed, especially a dramatic disclosure of something not previously known or realized.” Please note that the method used to calculate the target score was the same method that was employed in the playing conditions for the 2011 Queensway competition that were handed to all competing teams and was in the 2012 Queensway competition playing conditions that were again distributed to all competing teams. The GCA would expect that if there was a concern that it would have been raised either at the launching of the 2012 competition or at the pre-match briefing the day before the final. This was never an issue.
4. Also it must be noted that playing conditions should be consistent throughout the competition.
The Duckworth-Lewis method mentioned is very complicated and requires an on-site computer as well as personnel capable of applying the formula. This would have been required at each venue simultaneously during the earlier rounds. We do not have many Duckworth-Lewis experts in Guyana. Also ICC makes rules for international cricket and it is up to the governing body at each level to determine what is appropriate for that level.
The GCA agrees with Mr Mentore that there should have been medical personnel at the venue, and efforts were made to get a physiotherapist and when that did not work out, First Aiders were sought, but that did not work out either.
6. Regarding the De Sinco Under-13 Competition 2011, it must be pointed out that there is no prize money for that competition. The Banks DIH Tropical Mist Peewee Competition in 2010 which DCC won did not carry any prize money, and neither does the De Sinco Under-13 Competition of 2011. The reason that the presentation has not been made so far is because the sponsor wanted to get specific books to go along with the trophy and medals as he believed that boys of that age should be encouraged to read. He took some time to procure those books and had decided that at the opening ceremony for the 2012 competition the 2011 champions would be rewarded. It was unfortunate that the rains in July and August prevented this competition from being held during the school holidays. However, the sponsor had hopes of playing it during the Christmas holidays and thus making the presentation to the 2011 winners.
The competition will not be played because of recent unexpected developments.
7. It is important to note that since winning the De Sinco Under-13 competition in 2011, DCC has received all prize money due for:
. Winning the Brainstreet Under-15 League Competition in 2012
. Winning the Brainstreet Cup Competition in 2012
. Winning the David Persaud Investments Under-19 Competition 2012
. Placing second in the Queensway Cup 2011
8. The DCC team walked out of the NBS Final, literally. They did not complete the match and they did not attend the post-match presentation. In effect DCC withdrew itself from the competition and refused to take any further part, thereby disqualifying itself from the competition. Mr Mentore needs to explain the grounds on which DCC should be rewarded for their unruly, disrespectful display.
9. For the sake of the readers Mr Mentore needs to state clearly what aspects of the fiasco at the GCA/NBS Final he “unequivocally condemns” and how his club has dealt with the matter.
10. The NBS playing conditions, clause 26 on page 16, clearly state that teams would have to pay a fine of $15,000 for conceding a match or giving a walkover. Therefore there is no question about whether that matter is settled or not.
Yours faithfully,
Colin Alfred
PRO
GCA Executive
