Sustained captaincy tenures and fair play

THE EDITOR: Here we are in the middle of another cricket season and I have been moved finally to write some things I have been thinking for a very long time.

I do not want to focus on the actual play on the field, but on the management of the game and of the team. A cricket game does not begin when the players walk onto the field and it is not won simply by what happens on the field. It begins at the highest level with strong representation on international cricketing bodies. That is where issues such as faulty umpiring, refusal to make proper use of the “third umpire” and unfair World Cup selection rules should be taken up. In series after series, I have watched the West Indies team on the receiving end of the most blatantly unfair umpiring decisions, and series after series, I have wondered when some sort of complaint is going to be made. The present series is no exception — five bad decisions in the first Test — all against us. Remember the historic match at Lord’s, 100th anniversary I believe it was, when Wavell Hinds was hit on the shoulder and given lbw? Talk about not knowing your anatomy from your elbow! Wavell Hinds, poor fellow, went on to be badly victimised for the rest of that tour and it really threw his game off for quite a while. Where was the top-level support to rally behind him and help him feel less vulnerable to the caprices of hostile umpiring?

A couple of years ago, in a match here, one of our bowlers engaged in what some called deliberate slow bowling to drag out the last few overs of the match. He claimed it was because of a slight injury. No matter: the local authorities immediately and publicly jumped all over him, chastising him in the strongest terms, calling for the most stringent penalties. Where is this concern for the game and for fair play when we are on the receiving end of the attack? What about the Australian bowler who claimed he was aiming for the stumps, but instead by accident threw, very accurately, in the opposite direction at the batsman who was running down the pitch? That was at Kensington Oval and the Australian captain very promptly lodged a complaint about the crowd’s behaviour and stated his concerns for his team’s safety because some one flung a bottle onto the pitch. They didn’t throw it anywhere near as accurately as the bowler threw the ball, nor were they as close to their target. So the damage from the ball was potentially much greater. But what we heard about was the crowd’s behaviour, based on one badly aimed bottle.

I remember living in England as a student in the late 1990s and following the cricket matches against the West Indies avidly through the sports pages. I remember Viv Richards running up to an umpire waving his arms, appealing for a man to be given out. I remember the commentators and sports writers talking about Viv Richards’ attempt to intimidate the umpire and the debate that went on for days in the papers about whether he was going to be warned and fined for his behaviour. That was the kind of reporting that went on and it was worse for the matches played in the West Indies because it was impossible to find out the truth unless you talked to someone from home. Again and again, the West Indies was accused of cheating, unfairness, unsportsmanlike behaviour. There was blatant bias. I am not bringing this up to suggest that we should become the same. I simply wonder what happens at international meetings, whether our big, bad WICB spends its time striving to live up to some unrealistic “good sport” ideal, never complaining or rocking the boat because of “how it go look.” Why should we feel we have to be ten times as fair as everyone else or the white people will put us out of their game? We are the ones who brought the excitement back into cricket and we have been one of the main reasons people have been following cricket for the past 30 years. We have more than earned our place.

Surely we are not mendicants, begging cap in hand to be allowed to play, grateful just to be allowed on the pitch with the master? And the high-handed attitude which the WICB should have with the international cricketing bodies, it turns on the players at home. Cricket games are not won simply by what happens on the pitch, they are won by good and sensible management of teams and players. In what management text does it appear that changing leadership frequently and unpredictably will boost morale and improve performance? Clive Lloyd and Viv Richards enjoyed long and stable captaincies and the team therefore enjoyed great success under them. Doesn’t anyone see the connection? But there is no professionalism evident at the regional management level. The attitude is we have the talent, we are the best, just throw eleven men on the field, in any combination which will satisfy national jealousies, and we bound to win, man! Players are discarded capriciously and unkindly, novices are placed in unfairly demanding positions, training camps are a joke. Meanwhile, the opposition studies our form and technique via videos and continues to move ahead. We are making all kinds of teams look good through our failure to take the game seriously. I know the WICB is a body of great and mighty men, deserving of the utmost respect and reverence. But I wonder whether they have been able to move beyond regarding cricket and the West Indies team as anything other than a village game played by a village team. Just a fete match. Nothing serious.

KAREN MOORE
Champs Fleur