It must, by now, be quite obvious to listeners last Sunday, that Darren Sammy, the West Indies T20 Cricket captain could not, with such a large population hearing him, and at a high point of personal and team success, contain himself from forthright public criticism of the West Indies Cricket Board. And no doubt, this gesture must indicate the severity of a long-lingering situation already well visible at least to the West Indian public.
It was probably just a matter of time before the situation evolved to this point, as for years the Caricom Heads of Government themselves seemed to be incapable of dealing with the situation, no doubt somewhat encumbered by a view held by some citizens of the Region that “politics and sport do not mix”.
Yet, while Sammy could announce that various Heads, including Grenada Prime Minister Dr Keith Mitchell, Chairperson of the Prime Ministerial Subcommittee on Cricket Governance, had been in almost instant communication with him, before and following the team’s victory, the negative depths of the situation between “management and workers” was displayed by the captain’s public comment that he had not, up to that point, heard from the WICB President; and by evening time, the St Lucian Prime Minister was announcing that Sammy would be given a public welcome on his return to his homeland.
The baldness of the Communiqué emanating from the last Caricom Heads meeting in Belize on February 12-22, where the issues involved were discussed, reasonably clearly indicated that the relations between themselves and the WICB were at a virtual stalemate. For having “reaffirmed their commitment to the development of West Indies cricket”, and “discussed the various issues of the Report of the Joint Meeting of the Prime Ministerial Subcommittee on Cricket and Cricket Governance”, they continued to insist that the recommendations made “must be implemented” and “agreed to explore all options available to achieve the desired outcomes” and “to inform concerned parties of their position”.
Of course, the Heads of Government have always been aware that, strictly speaking, they really have no formal jurisdiction over the WICB, a situation which the current President has made fairly clear to those who believe that they have a say in matters that they consider relevant to the wider Caribbean public. And such informal pressures that they might well consider taking vis-à-vis the Board, would probably be felt to be unpalatable to their publics, no doubt always ready to express the commonly stated view that “politics and sport do not mix’.
The situation now clearly brought to light will soon reveal whether the sensitivities of the Board can be made amenable to governmental opinion, expressed as representing public opinion in their various jurisdictions. And it might not be difficult to now have a consultation, initiated initially by Prime Minister Mitchell responsible for Cricket Governance, for serious consideration, to begin, of the Report prepared by Professor Eudine Barriteau, now Principal of the UWI Cave Campus which has previously been given short shrift by the WICB.
It is not unlikely that the Board might still wish to insist on its own autonomy which it seems to consider as inhibiting “political interference”. But no doubt, the Board is well aware of the substantial investments, made over the years, by governments to ensure appropriate physical arrangements for the conduct of the game, a factor which Heads of Government consider of substantial significance as far as the taxpayers of their countries are concerned.
And clearly too, in these times, the Board, even as it has specific legal rights and responsibilities, must cease to invoke its autonomy as an automatic shutter, and recognize what governments, and no doubt the wider Caribbean publics, consider as a matter of mutual interest between government and people, even when neither of those parties are formal shareholders in the cricket enterprise.
The pursuit of collective discussions between Board and Governments, while not felt, up to now, to be valuable by the Board, must be recognized by the Board as a situation in which there is a transitioning of responsibilities as governments have become more committed to facilitating the arrangements through which the successful conduct of the game has become possible. And an effort must now be made by the Board to understand the responsibilities imposed on governments by their publics, to ensure that the arrangements facilitating proper conditions for playing the game, are now a dual private-public responsibility, for which a continuing, and therefore institutionalized, in effect public-private consultation, must be made to work.
So the present events, including the sensibilities arising from what is clearly a sense of resentment by players considering themselves as full professionals, and by governments, must now be used to insist that the management of the game is, in these times, a collective effort of what we might describe as private and public players, the latter involving the governments themselves.
But the record up to now, might induce a certain resistance from the Board, annoyed not only by last weekend’s widespread players’ criticism, but also by what will be seen by the Board, as support for that criticism by the Governments themselves.
We suggest, as indicated above, that the instrument of joint consultation, designed at removing obvious disgruntlements by both players and government, be utilized by Caricom Heads. There is a sufficient number of persons interested, from different perspectives and locations, capable of facilitating this approach. There must be, now, a strategy of joint government-WICB consideration of the Barriteau Report, as the initiating step for what must be, in effect, a modernization of the game, not only by players who are now largely professionals, but by the Board, whose performance suggests a hangover from earlier times, when the management of cricket was considered a task specific to the “owners” of the game.
