No retainer, no professionalism

THE EDITOR: What another unholy mess the WICB has got us into. Lara is right that in all disputes there is some responsibility by the disputing parties. However, given the history of the Board’s messups and the particular history of this current issue, it is really difficult not to attribute almost the entire fiasco to the Board. Firstly let us look at the results of the Board’s recent decision, which is what they should have done before adopting it. If they did, and did not foresee some of the possible outcomes, or they did and still proceeded, then we have an even larger problem on our hands than any West Indian could ever imagine.

The Board has sent an unambiguous message to all players, young or old, experienced or apprentice, hero or villain, performer or non performer, fix your business because “we” fixing ours. Needless to say that it is ironic that this is what the Cable and Wireless crew did in the absence of retainer contracts and guaranteed terms and conditions. What does the Board expect? The Windies are the only Test playing team without retainer contracts. This is one of many shortcomings and disadvantages the players have had to live with for years. The Board simply does not get it. Like many, it has convinced itself that the eventual product on the field is a result of player indiscipline and commitment.

The Board does not understand that whenever a person applies for, and is given a job, he is offered a salary and conditions that would obligate and motivate him to perform. He does not do the job for a period and then gets compensated  according to performance. In short the Board is required to put all the necessary infrastructure in place, including appropriate compensation arrangements. If then the players fail to perform on or off the field, then from captain to cook they must be unceremoniously dismissed. That is how professional institutions are run.

In the current impasse, the Board has allowed itself, due to its lack of sophistication, its naivete and the notion that Digicel is doing us a favour, to be caught in between the internecine battle for market share by two corporate telecom giants. Both have rightly acted in their own interests. The Board does not recognise that Digicel would not put 20 million dollars into West Indian cricket if it was not getting bang for its buck. The Windies still have market value.

What a disgrace this Board is to West Indian people. For 15 years it has failed to put the right financial, technological, managerial and developmental infrastructure into place when it had the advantage over every other Test playing team with the best raw material and performances. The Board is akin to a country with the best of physical resources like oil but without the know-how and technology to get it out of the ground.

N SEALEY
Arima