Dear Editor,
Before we really knew what was going on with the India tour dispute, SN in the usual way of defending the status quo decided to do just that in two Editorials, `The West Indies Cricket Crisis,’ of 24 October, 2014 and `The West Indies Cricket Crisis II,’ of October 31, 2014.
In the first Editorial some pronounced statements were made: “The players have washed their cricket maroons and whites in the full glare of world opinion.” “Greed and ignorance have prevailed and brought unprecedented shame and embarrassment on the entire region.” “The players are mercenaries; with no great loyalty to the maroon cap.” “That the players should have been willing parties in this disgraceful episode is perhaps the unkindest cut of all.”
After castigating and putting down the players, the editorial lamented that it didn’t know how the board intends to repair the damage that has been done. Maybe realising the magnitude of the damage that had been done, and feeling a tad embarrassed because leaked information painted Cameron as a malingerer, you tried to balance your attack with, “Cameron should have attempted to resolve instead of disingenuously insisting on dealing with the discredited head of the WIPA.” And this finally ended play: “The BCCI holds the WICB and not the players responsible for the whole disgraceful debacle.”
To use simple words to describe Cameron’s action during this time would be diplomatic. Mr Patel of the BCCI in his capacity tried to do Cameron’s job. While Cameron who is the CEO of the conglomerate called the West Indies Cricket Board was cooling out in the pavilion, Mr Patel was on the field and off the field with the labourers. It was incumbent that Cameron as CEO get there immediately to understand the nature of the grievance and nip it as quickly as possible. If Mr Patel and his senior officials were able to get the WI players to stay for the duration of four one days, which could be the equivalent of eight days, where was the CEO of the conglomerate?
This debacle needs to be placed squarely where it belongs, on the shoulders of the CEO of the WICB (a pity we can’t just take the fine out of his savings account). His refusal to even intercede, accompanied by “we will only deal with the acknowledged representatives” reeks of arrogance. Which is why his response to the Trinidad Express; “you destroy a nation’s heritage over an internal dispute,” was both self serving and pathetic. His arrogance never allowed him to understand that it had become labour versus capital. The labour are the players and the capital is the WICB. Therefore when the players (the labour) have issues the WICB (management) has issues.
In her article of 6,11, 2014 in the Trinidad Express, `Who owns WI Cricket’, Sheila Rampersad said; “it is difficult, therefore, to avoid concluding that the administration (read that as Cameron) of the WI cricket has failed spectacularly.” Dr Rudi Webster concluded that the WI behaved penny wise and pound foolish. He likened the episode to a professor who auctions off twenty dollars, sometimes egos get in the way and the bill can bring in as much as two hundred dollars. Do you see the connection?
As for the second editorial, SN took nearly 825 words to say nothing of substance. The editorial was rife with speculation, except when you said that, “to be fair to Mr Bravo he should not be the only one castigated for his role in the drama.” Why Bravo? Why not Cameron? And who do you think should fall on their sword voluntarily, now that you know more? We do know that there will be recriminations, because human frailties must vent. It’s expected.
For those of us who truly understand what he meant by living the immortal words of C L R James, “what do they know of cricket, who only cricket knows” would never be happy to see a constant fight between the WICB and the players, it would be like looking at your two children physically fighting. However the WICB must understand that ability must be rewarded. For in the final analysis who feels it knows it.
Yours faithfully,
Milton Bruce
