by TONY COZIER
AS West Indies cricket teeters on the edge of extinction, with the president of the board, his directors and the players all seemingly unaware of how close they have brought it to the precipice, yet another independent committee has been given the challenging job of trying to save it from itself.
Read full article...
The telling timeline
-
mikesiva
- Posts: 19320
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:30 am
- Location: Watford, Hertfordshire
- Contact:
Cozier's a bit more critical of the WICB than Becca....
'For all the shocking finality of the players downing their bats and balls and heading home, the buck stopped with the WICB, the governing body of the sport in the region; this much the BCCI made clear in blaming it for its “inability to resolve internal issues with its players”. Cameron had the opportunity, at a media conference originally scheduled to follow Tuesday’s emergency meeting, to at least respond to such sharp public censure and to the timeline the BCCI set out that led to the final decision. It never materialised; it was replaced by a release that listed the four decisions made. The couple of diligent reporters who managed to buttonhole Cameron afterwards were told they were restricted to two questions. “We deliberated on all the matters. We’ve come up with a few positions that we are going to take forward,” was all they got – and the sheet of paper with the meeting’s decisions, another of which was to “request a meeting with the BCCI”. Either Cameron and his advisers believed it would serve no purpose to further aggravate their powerful, indignant hosts by responding to the certainty of difficult questions or, more likely, he wasn’t prepared to face them from the pack of relentless journalists. The likely queries were obvious. Would he like to comment on the BCCI’s revelation that it had received his e-mail at 3 a.m. (India time) on October 8, eleven hours before the scheduled start of the first ODI in Kochi, stating that he was withdrawing the team from the tour? Was he aware that, as the BCCI timeline put it, its secretary Sanjay Patel “rushed to Kochi and spoke to the players and managed to get on with the match”? Did his position not dictate that he should have undertaken such a mission himself, as soon as he could get to India? As it was, neither he nor any of his directors made the trip, even as the conflict became increasingly more impassioned. Cameron might have commented on Patel’s assertion that he asked him in Dubai on October 12 whether the rest of the tour would proceed and the claim that he replied he would give an answer by close of the business day, October 15? The BCCI maintained that it took an e-mailed reminder from Patel to prompt him to reply, at 3 a.m. (India time) on October 17, that “the WICB are not able to provide any assurances or guarantees”. The correspondence said it would “communicate its position by the end of the day on October 17”. Was that so? Most astonishing of all the BCCI’s assertions was that the first e-mail it received cancelling the tour came at 10 a.m. on October 17 from Richard Pybus, the director of cricket and an employee of the board, the reason for whose presence in India was obscure. “WICB’s position is that if the players refuse to play, then the players must return home and the rest of the ODI and Test tour is called off,” the BCCI quoted Pybus as stating in his e-mail. “This has been discussed with the WICB president and CEO and they are fully aware of developments here”. According to the BCCI, confirmation came four hours later from the manager, Sir Richie Richardson.'
What was Pybus doing making a decision like this? He seems to have sleepwalked the WICB into a legal mess....
'For all the shocking finality of the players downing their bats and balls and heading home, the buck stopped with the WICB, the governing body of the sport in the region; this much the BCCI made clear in blaming it for its “inability to resolve internal issues with its players”. Cameron had the opportunity, at a media conference originally scheduled to follow Tuesday’s emergency meeting, to at least respond to such sharp public censure and to the timeline the BCCI set out that led to the final decision. It never materialised; it was replaced by a release that listed the four decisions made. The couple of diligent reporters who managed to buttonhole Cameron afterwards were told they were restricted to two questions. “We deliberated on all the matters. We’ve come up with a few positions that we are going to take forward,” was all they got – and the sheet of paper with the meeting’s decisions, another of which was to “request a meeting with the BCCI”. Either Cameron and his advisers believed it would serve no purpose to further aggravate their powerful, indignant hosts by responding to the certainty of difficult questions or, more likely, he wasn’t prepared to face them from the pack of relentless journalists. The likely queries were obvious. Would he like to comment on the BCCI’s revelation that it had received his e-mail at 3 a.m. (India time) on October 8, eleven hours before the scheduled start of the first ODI in Kochi, stating that he was withdrawing the team from the tour? Was he aware that, as the BCCI timeline put it, its secretary Sanjay Patel “rushed to Kochi and spoke to the players and managed to get on with the match”? Did his position not dictate that he should have undertaken such a mission himself, as soon as he could get to India? As it was, neither he nor any of his directors made the trip, even as the conflict became increasingly more impassioned. Cameron might have commented on Patel’s assertion that he asked him in Dubai on October 12 whether the rest of the tour would proceed and the claim that he replied he would give an answer by close of the business day, October 15? The BCCI maintained that it took an e-mailed reminder from Patel to prompt him to reply, at 3 a.m. (India time) on October 17, that “the WICB are not able to provide any assurances or guarantees”. The correspondence said it would “communicate its position by the end of the day on October 17”. Was that so? Most astonishing of all the BCCI’s assertions was that the first e-mail it received cancelling the tour came at 10 a.m. on October 17 from Richard Pybus, the director of cricket and an employee of the board, the reason for whose presence in India was obscure. “WICB’s position is that if the players refuse to play, then the players must return home and the rest of the ODI and Test tour is called off,” the BCCI quoted Pybus as stating in his e-mail. “This has been discussed with the WICB president and CEO and they are fully aware of developments here”. According to the BCCI, confirmation came four hours later from the manager, Sir Richie Richardson.'
What was Pybus doing making a decision like this? He seems to have sleepwalked the WICB into a legal mess....
-
Gils
- Posts: 3469
- Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 3:39 pm
Setting up a " task force " to look into it........a straight forward set of events, if only for the purpose of a WICBC revisionist, after the horse has bolted, 2nd take.Would he like to comment on the BCCI’s revelation that it had received his e-mail at 3 a.m. (India time) on October 8, eleven hours before the scheduled start of the first ODI in Kochi, stating that he was withdrawing the team from the tour?
Attempting to cover backside without further antagonizing the BCCI, an exercise in futility.