The Independent Voice of West Indies Cricket

Message Board Archives

Looking forward to hearing from the players

 
imusic 2014-10-22 13:06:20 

that left India

Should be interesting

A few more things to look forward to:

Statement from the WIPA executive on the issue

WICBC's plan to guarantee the BCCI, ICC, and other member boards that not meeting their obligations will never happen again in the future

The tour management team report

 
Walco 2014-10-22 13:11:43 

In reply to imusic

Barry Wilkinson said last night on Mason that one player told him that this whole mess could have been avoided if Cameron had met with them in India after the Dubai meeting with Patel of the BCCI

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 13:13:12 

In reply to imusic

I'm looking forward to seeing them banned. There is no excuse for holding fans, their employer, and the BCCI hostage over a dispute amonst themselves. They should all be banned for a year.

 
Nemesis 2014-10-22 13:14:45 

In reply to Arawak

I wanted a two year ban but one year would be fine with me.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 13:16:20 

In reply to imusic

Court case brewing. I spoke to two players who were in India and the consensus among everyone was to let the lawyers handle the throwing out of the MOU. No public statements so don't hold your breath too long.

_r

 
imusic 2014-10-22 13:18:36 

In reply to Arawak

I agree. There must be consequences. What those consequences will be remains to be seen

I have to assume the players fully understood the possible ramifications of their actions but deemed the matter important enough and bigger than the consequences of said actions.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 13:19:49 

In reply to Admin

I spoke to two players who were in India and the consensus among everyone was to let the lawyers handle the throwing out of the MOU.

If that is the case, who cancelled the tour then?

 
Admin 2014-10-22 13:24:20 

In reply to imusic

The WICB.

_r

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 13:27:53 

In reply to Admin

Do you have any evidence to back this up?

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 13:28:57 

Will the ICC accept a WI "A" team for the World Cup. rolleyes

 
tc1 2014-10-22 13:33:32 

In reply to Gupta
the wicb may ban the fringe players for a short time.

but could they play for their local teams

 
Admin 2014-10-22 13:35:07 

In reply to Arawak

10. The WICB reiterates that as a result of the action taken by the players the Board was forced with no other option but to discontinue the tour.


Source: WICB press release.

_ryan

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 13:38:29 

In reply to Admin

10. The WICB reiterates that as a result of the action taken by the players the Board was forced with no other option but to discontinue the tour.


How do you continue a tour without players?

Semantically, you may be correct. However, in every way that matters, the players cancelled the tour.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 13:39:33 

In reply to Arawak

with no other option


I can come up with several other options.

_r

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 13:41:31 

As a consequence and as a matter of principle, we cannot be party to this grave injustice. The players regretfully wish to advise that they can no longer accept this situation which have affected each and every player in a very negative way. The players are under tremendous stress and undue pressure. We have informed the Manager and Coach of our decision to return home with the hope that these issues will be addressed to the satisfaction of all.


I wonder why nobody wants to explain this?

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 13:51:25 

In reply to Admin

I can come up with several other options.


I'm listening.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:01:22 

In reply to Cuter

As a consequence and as a matter of principle, we cannot be party to this grave injustice. The players regretfully wish to advise that they can no longer accept this situation which have affected each and every player in a very negative way. The players are under tremendous stress and undue pressure. We have informed the Manager and Coach of our decision to return home with the hope that these issues will be addressed to the satisfaction of all.


I cannot reconcile the above...

With this below

I spoke to two players who were in India and the consensus among everyone was to let the lawyers handle the throwing out of the MOU.



Something not adding up


Now....one is reported as an official statement from Captain Bravo on behalf of the players


The other is 2nd hand information passed on by the founder (and owner?) of this site. Usually _admin is very credible.

But there's definitely a disconnect between the 2 statements. Can anyone fill in the blanks?

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:03:27 

In reply to Arawak

1. Fly to India with Wavell and sit down to talk.
2. Pay the $35K for this tour and tell WIPA to fix their shit afterwards.
3. Negotiate with Wavell to find a way to make up the 60% - $70 paycheck shortfall.

Shall I continue?

_r

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:05:12 

In reply to imusic

Can anyone fill in the blanks?



Sure, here you go.

_ryan

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:06:09 

In reply to Arawak

lol

You keep listening. All you will get is legalese. The players messed up and now they are being advised legally on how to spin that decision.

The players cannot cancel the tour so of course they did not cancel the tour. If you are a teacher and no one comes to class did the student cancel the class?

People do things that are wrong and they look for lawyers to make it right. The BCCI also messed up by refusing to let the WICB field and alternate team but they have a tremendous amount of leverage so they will not lose.

A calypsonian won a competition. The crowd was unhappy with the decision. A stipulation of the contract was the winning calypsonian has to perform again after being crowned the winning. That did not happen.

"He feared for his life."

Good answer.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:08:50 

In reply to nick2020

The BCCI also messed up by refusing to let the WICB field and alternate team

Where has it been reported that....

1 - The WICBC offered to send an alternate team?

2 - The BCCI refused said alternate team?

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:10:23 

In reply to Admin

Question

Have the players ever reciprocated?

In others words when the shoe was on the other foot have the players ever said we will suspend our current contract, take less money temporarily until we can find a better solution?

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:12:33 

In reply to imusic

This was said by journalists with sources. But I won't sit here trying to defend that. I will leave that up to time for the truth to come out.

That statement will be either true or false one day.

Is it false right now?

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 14:13:18 

In reply to nick2020

Man you are wasting your time. The pro-player crew never sees anything wrong with the players stance. afterall they are poorly educated fellows just wanting a buck to feed themselves and family

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:14:13 

In reply to imusic

Where has it been reported that....

1 - The WICBC offered to send an alternate team?

2 - The BCCI refused said alternate team?


It's in the WICB statement. Keep up, nah.

_r

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:16:01 

WICB statement:

2. The WICB wishes to further clarify that its proposed alternative arrangement of a replacement West Indies team was not considered acceptable. The WICB is understanding of this position.


_r

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:16:45 

In reply to Admin

It was an extraordinary situation.

- Arriving in India without contracts.
- Contracts arrived with 60%-70% pay cut.
- Call Wavell and ask WTF.
- Wavell says, wait, don't sign, lemme find some money.
- Wavell calls DaveC and mumbles...
- Dave says FU, we got an MOU that you signed.
- Wavell mumbles something to players about we trying to find the money.
- Players again say "WTF dude, what did you sign. Where's the MOU?"
- Wavell mumbles some more.
- Bravo writes letter saying "dude, these conflicts catch up with you and Michael Hall."
- More letters are sent to DaveC, saying "dude, Wavell had no authority to sign whatever it is he said he signed. We still ain't see the MOU."
- Dave says to please to F off, I only dealing with Wavell.
- Players warn that situation is untenable and action may be taken.
- Players play and ask again for situation to be settled.
- Nothing happens.
- Players play again... etc. Another warning.
- Nothing.
- Players play again.
- Shit hits fan.

Who's the terrorist now?


The questions are:

1 - Should the players have finished the entire tour and then come back to deal with the issue?

2 - Is this the first time players have started a series without contracts?

3 - Did the players threaten to walk out on the tour hoping that would be enough to coerce the WICBC to grant their demand of reverting to the old contract until something could be worked out?

4 - Did the WICBC decide to call the players "bluff"?

5 - Given the drastic reduction in player remuneration, did Wavell Hinds & they WIPA Executive have some kind of side deal with the WICBC, or can they just simply be that incompetent?

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:18:08 

In reply to Admin

Thanks. Didn't see it previously

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:19:47 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

The pro-WICBC crew never sees anything wrong with the WICBC stance. afterall they are highly educated fellows just wanting to a buck to feed themselves and family

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:20:18 

In reply to imusic

1 - Should the players have finished the entire tour and then come back to deal with the issue?


Could, sure. Should, maybe. If you want my opinion, they played it perfectly. Leverage.

2 - Is this the first time players have started a series without contracts?


No. But it's the first time contracts showed up with ridiculous money missing.

3 - Did the players threaten to walk out on the tour hoping that would be enough to coerce the WICBC to grant their demand of reverting to the old contract until something could be worked out?


Probably. I can't speak for them. If I'm a guessing man, that's exactly what happened. They opted to use the only leverage they had. Very smart, IMHO of course.

4 - Did the WICBC decide to call the players "bluff"?


Yes. Exactly. But they weren't bluffing, as we all found out.

5 - Given the drastic reduction in player remuneration, did Wavell Hinds & they WIPA Executive have some kind of side deal with the WICBC, or can they just simply be that incompetent?


I've asked this before. Incompetence? Or worse?

_ryan

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:21:09 

In reply to Admin

Imusic is not going to take the word of the WICB is what I gather. We will find out the truth one day.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:22:24 

In reply to Admin

Could, sure. Should, maybe. If you want my opinion, they played it perfectly. Leverage.

Does the ends justify the means in this case?

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 14:22:35 

In reply to imusic

Like I keep saying, unless someone can provided additional information which surfaced subsequent to this Last letter from Bravo, I have no choice but to believe that the players abandon the tour

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 14:22:39 

In reply to Admin

1. Fly to India with Wavell and sit down to talk.


Surely you mean fly to Trinidad with Wavell? Cut out the middle man.

2. Pay the $35K for this tour and tell WIPA to fix their shit afterwards.


Would that have worked?

3. Negotiate with Wavell to find a way to make up the 60% - $70 paycheck shortfall.


Or this?

Shall I continue?


Sure!

but let's look at the BCCI's timeline of WICB's withdrawal:

17 October – 2:00 pm

Mr. Richie Richardson sent a mail to the BCCI stating the following:

'Despite agreeing to play the 4th ODI in Dharamshala, regrettably, the current West Indies players have decided that they will not participate any further in this tour and wish to return home after this match. In light of this, I suggest that the entire squad travel to Delhi tomorrow and be booked into a hotel there, until international return flights have been booked. On behalf of the entire squad and WICB, I apologise for the inconvenience caused.'



Seems pretty clear that it was the players who called it quits.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 14:24:10 

In reply to Admin

What if this impasse results in WI cricket being banned/suspended? How would the use of their leverage have benefitted the players?

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:25:00 

In reply to Admin

Admin,

Did the players go too far?

They may have ended cricket in the caribbean as we know it. What that the appropriate course of action?

I guess that is a leading question. Let me start over.

What do you believe is the possible future of West Indies cricket after this fiasco? If you believe this could end our cricket then do you think the actions were appropriate?

Unemployment gone up?

 
imusic 2014-10-22 14:25:22 

In reply to Admin

Mason asked Barry Wilkinson an "odd" question yesterday. He asked him if he knew if WI captain Dwayne Bravo had a contract for the tour.

Wilkinson replied he would be extremely shocked if Bravo DID NOT HAVE A CONTRACT

Mason then told Barry to "do your research" and left it there.

Weird.

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:27:29 

In reply to imusic

That was no empty question. A coy way of throwing that in the public domain.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:28:26 

In reply to imusic

Does the ends justify the means in this case?


This is up for debate and discussion. At the very least, it signals the end of Wavell/Hall in charge of WIPA with all those conflicts all over the place. And these are not perceived conflicts. They are real and obvious and it's mind-boggling that it just sits there like an old leftover sandwich.

On which planet is it appropriate for a CPL official/executive (the employer) to negotiate a contract for the WI players (the employees)? I know that anything goes in the Caribbean but come on.

In which world is it appropriate for Wavell to be a JCA board member and the chairman of Jamaica selectors and still be the president and CEO of WIPA?!? And his explanation was that Dinas was once a WICB director so it's all good.

You know, it's all comical to me and I enjoy picking it apart but if I was a real stakeholder, you won't imagine the anger. Now you see why the players, as Bravo/Roach/Pollard/Sammy explained, had to take a stand.

_ryan

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 14:31:38 

In reply to Admin

Yea take a stand. Like this was about world peace. They took a stand when it threatened their paycheck.

 
Gmoney 2014-10-22 14:33:05 

In reply to Admin

I believe Hinds got caught up with the money and sold out the very people that put him there.

What I could not understand is, there were five senior x players on the tour -

Lloyd
Holding
Bishop
Richardson
Haynes

And they would have advised the players to walk away from the tour?

There got to more to this than we know

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 14:33:31 

In reply to Admin

At the very least, it signals the end of Wavell/Hall in charge of WIPA with all those conflicts all over the place. And these are not perceived conflicts. They are real and obvious and it's mind-boggling that it just sits there like an old leftover sandwich.


I don't understand the Hall connection post leaving WIPA.

However, wasn't Wavell elected by the membership and empowered to do the things he did and is doing?

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 14:33:37 

In reply to Admin

All you said above, to me is that the players were at least negligent in having Hinds and Hall continue to be WIPA execs. And so their beef is clearly with WIPA

 
WestDem 2014-10-22 14:34:48 

In reply to Admin



You may able to answer this for me....With the implementation of the additional contracts issued to the FC players:

1: What is the annual amount paid in total for the additional contract?

2: What amount of # 1 is funded by WICB and what is funded by the reduction of players payments?

If we get these numbers, then there can be additional headache fuh de WICB.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:35:07 

In reply to nick2020

Did the players go too far?


Maybe. History will figure that out. IMHO, their stand was appropriate. You can argue that I'm wrong, that's okay.

They may have ended cricket in the caribbean as we know it. What that the appropriate course of action?


West Indies cricket died a long time ago. We're just all fixing our suits at the burial.


What do you believe is the possible future of West Indies cricket after this fiasco? If you believe this could end our cricket then do you think the actions were appropriate?

Unemployment gone up?


What masquerades as West Indies cricket will continue. Maybe, just maybe, maaaaaybbbbeeeee, the board will be restructured and the archaic territorial approach will be abandoned. I always argued that there needs to be a full official burial before something happens. I'm not holding my breath, but just maybe.

_r

 
Pacy 2014-10-22 14:35:24 

In reply to nick2020


Did the players go too far?

They may have ended cricket in the caribbean as we know it. What that the appropriate course of action?

I guess that is a leading question. Let me start over.

What do you believe is the possible future of West Indies cricket after this fiasco? If you believe this could end our cricket then do you think the actions were appropriate?


Who are the custodians of WI Cricket? What effort did they take to get this situation to a closure?

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 14:38:00 

In reply to Pacy

The only effort you are interested in would be revert to the old mou

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:39:40 

In reply to Arawak

I don't understand the Hall connection post leaving WIPA.


Michael Hall never left WIPA. He is still a director today.

_r

 
Admin 2014-10-22 14:41:24 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

And so their beef is clearly with WIPA


Dude, have you been asleep all week. Their beef is with WIPA. Fuq man, keep up nah!

_r

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 14:44:49 

In reply to Admin

dude you can spin this how you want, the players should have completed the tour

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 14:45:42 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Fuzzy, forget about the international players for a while, did Wavell have a mandate from the players to sign the MOU without any input from them?

Now don't tell me his election as President provided this mandate.

It did not.

 
carl0002 2014-10-22 14:46:07 

In reply to Arawak
Not only that India rejected a replacement team.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 14:48:52 

In reply to Courtesy

I believe whatever he negotiated should have been reflective of what the players that WIPA represent willed. De he do that? Only He and the negotiating team can say.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 14:50:36 

In reply to Admin

So why punish everybody then? I see u coming around bit by bit

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 14:51:59 

In reply to Courtesy

so are you saying the wicb should have asked Wevell did he have the mandate of the players?

 
Pacy 2014-10-22 14:59:16 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Not necessarily Fuzzy.

When there is employee unrest there is a need for dialogue and clarifications. At times employees might not be able to see the bigger picture as they are way down the ladder and that is the reason HIGHLY QUALIFIED people are identified to take care of the administrative position.

1. There was a need for the Leaders or representatives to be there to discuss and clarify the Players queries. If WICB and WIPA's intentions were right they should have tried to explain (This never happened)

2. Also in a crisis like this, when all the players raise a concern which is genuine (as a responsible Organisation) WICB could have agreed for the existing salaries to continue for this series alone.

3. Even if WICB had said that they completely understand their concerns and we will look into the pain points of the MOU and clarify / Discuss post the tour.

One of these assurances would have gone a long way in averting this problem.

If I am player, I would clearly not believe in coming back to the Caribbean and have a dialogue. If they are not interested in a dialogue in this crisis situation they would never do that when the series is over and the WICB pockets are full.

This reminds me very much of the previous strike when English were here. Strike was looming large and WICB did not act for more than a month and finally when the players reacted with a strike in the next series the fault was all dumped on players. Same tactics by WICB again but unfortunately BCCI exposed them.

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 14:59:21 

In reply to Admin

Michael Hall never left WIPA. He is still a director today.


Good lord. I thought when he resigned as CEO he was done.

This is a tangled mess.

Of course, isn't WIPA a stakeholder in the WICB as well?

 
WestDem 2014-10-22 15:00:30 

In reply to Cuter



so are you saying the wicb should have asked Wevell did he have the mandate of the players?


Questions were not asked, the only thing that was asked is for Wavell to sign de damn MOU!

 
Arawak 2014-10-22 15:02:54 

In reply to Cuter

so are you saying the wicb should have asked Wevell did he have the mandate of the players?


I'm curious to know what the WIPA's constitution or governing rules say. I would expect that they grant Wavell the authority to act on the players' behalf. If he is not doing that to their satisfaction, that is their problem... they elected him.

OTOH if he is required to seek a mandate for every negotation, and failed, then they surely have the right to recall him. You'd think.

What do the unionistas here think about that?

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:04:51 

In reply to Cuter

You see Cuter, this whole matter arose because of an MOU that was signed without the input of the players. Wavell admitted that much.

It is incumbent on the WICB once it was drawn to their attention as gatekeepers of the game to take corrective measures ASAP.

Simple mgt practice. Not rocket science.

The mgt of the WICB has a greater burden of responsibility to ensure that they meet their obligations to India.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 15:06:56 

In reply to Courtesy

Ok...What sort of corrective measures would you have suggested?

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 15:07:40 

In reply to Arawak

I would expect that they grant Wavell the authority to act on the players' behalf



I was thinking the same thing

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:12:54 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Communication first:

(i)De Prez was in Dubai. For chissakes just hop a bird and have some dialogue with the players.

(2) There is some information released today by at least one cricketer that there was no information on the planned trip to India by the three officials from the WICB and WIPA.

By jove!! You are not running a ti boutique and in this modern age of communication. Come on man.

That is only on the communication front. There are other mgt options that have been well ventilated.

.........

Chest beating by the WICB got us to where we are now.

 
carl0002 2014-10-22 15:15:08 

In reply to Courtesy

It is incumbent on the WICB once it was drawn to their attention as gatekeepers of the game to take corrective measures ASAP.

You know I not going to agree with this one.

I asked you a question the other day and can't find the thread to determine if you provided an answer.

Can you confirm that Bravo approached Wavell with instructions to get something done so they can play and Wavell told Bravo there is no movement on the issue with WICB?

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 15:15:38 

In reply to Courtesy

I do not disagree on the communications issue, but I have my doubts whether any promise short of immediately reverting to old MOU would have placated the players

 
WestDem 2014-10-22 15:15:50 

In reply to Courtesy



You may able to answer this for me....With the implementation of the additional contracts issued to the FC players:

1: What is the annual amount paid in total for the additional contract?

2: What amount of # 1 is funded by WICB and what is funded by the reduction of players payments?

You have any idea about this?

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:17:59 

In reply to carl0002

Do you think Wavell on his own without any query from the players came to the decision that the tour contract should not be signed?

 
Admin 2014-10-22 15:18:15 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

For this tour, they could have reverted to the $35K from the old MOU. Or simply find $35K, save the tour, and let WIPA sort themselves out afterwards.

You have doubts this could have saved the tour?

Dave was convinced the players were bluffing. He told other directors not to worry, that they are bluffing.

Well, they weren't.

_r

 
Commie 2014-10-22 15:18:54 

In reply to Admin

Dave vs Rams...part 223.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 15:19:24 

In reply to WestDem

1: What is the annual amount paid in total for the additional contract?

2: What amount of # 1 is funded by WICB and what is funded by the reduction of players payments?


I don't have these figures. Maybe I do but I'm too lazy/busy to go look. I'll look later.

_r

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 15:20:35 

In reply to Admin

I guess they were both bluffing...as is the norm between these parties.

 
carl0002 2014-10-22 15:20:44 

In reply to Courtesy
No.

Now answer mine.

Tenks.

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:20:59 

In reply to WestDem

Sponsorship fees given up by the international players = 2.4 million US.

The total amount paid to be paid to the 90 regional players is contained in Wavell's letter.

Take it from there.

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:23:22 

In reply to carl0002

There is a post from Admin which adequately spells out the sequence of events with some slight embellisments.


It was an extraordinary situation.

- Arriving in India without contracts.
- Contracts arrived with 60%-70% pay cut.
- Call Wavell and ask WTF.
- Wavell says, wait, don't sign, lemme find some money.
- Wavell calls DaveC and mumbles...
- Dave says FU, we got an MOU that you signed.
- Wavell mumbles something to players about we trying to find the money.
- Players again say "WTF dude, what did you sign. Where's the MOU?"
- Wavell mumbles some more.
- Bravo writes letter saying "dude, these conflicts catch up with you and Michael Hall."
- More letters are sent to DaveC, saying "dude, Wavell had no authority to sign whatever it is he said he signed. We still ain't see the MOU."
- Dave says to please to F off, I only dealing with Wavell.
- Players warn that situation is untenable and action may be taken.
- Players play and ask again for situation to be settled.
- Nothing happens.
- Players play again... etc. Another warning.
- Nothing.
- Players play again.
- Shit hits fan.

Who's the terrorist now?

 
WestDem 2014-10-22 15:30:08 

In reply to Courtesy



Sponsorship fees given up by the international players = 2.4 million US.


That is an average of $26.7K per player coming from the International Players....Darn! my guess is de WICB not funding a penny to give these additional players contracts.

An additional $72K in Union Dues to the WIPA (3%)....

Now de odda question...The above Sponsorship Fees is separate from their match fee and retainer contracts, right?

 
imusic 2014-10-22 15:33:56 

In reply to Admin

Dave was convinced the players were bluffing. He told other directors not to worry, that they are bluffing.

IF THIS IS ACCURATE....sounds like the heart of it all

Players before 1st ODI - we go pull out de tour if you don't restore the old contract terms

WICBC - steupes....pull out nah! Go ahead...make my day

Lloyd et al - Allyuh cyah pull out man. Play de game and dey go reach a settlement

Players before 2nd ODI - dem man like dey eh hearin we or wha?

Lloyd et al - Doh worry man...yuh eh see Cameron flyin to Dubai? He go fall een right after and deal wit de issue

3rd ODI washout

Players before 4th ODI - Nutting from dese people. if we keep threatenin and do nutting, dey go jes laff at we and doh do anyting. We have to stop playing NOW

Indian Host - Fellas please....allyuh cyah do dat. We done sell out de match already. Come on man!

Ambrose - Fellas....allyuh cyah pull out now. At least play this one and hopefully the WICBC will make a statement saying they will resolve the issue

WICBC - Mute

Players after the 4th ODI - NAH! Cameron eh even call to say nutting. We cyah continue this tour. Man have no contract and we now talkin bout 75% cut in pay? We going home

Lloyd, Ambrose, Richardson et al - But But But.....fellas....oh gorm


Players go home - OH SHIT! What have we done?

WICBC - OH SHIT! Yuh mean dey really leave de tour in trute? SHIT!

Wavell/HAll - Hello?? Hello?

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:34:37 

In reply to WestDem

Now de odda question...The above Sponsorship Fees is separate from their match fee and retainer contracts, right?


Yep.

The players wanted this to be beefed up to make up the shortfall or at least not to have them severely disadvantaged.

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 15:36:51 

In reply to Courtesy

but mate, WICB engaged Wevell who is the sole authority to act on the players,

they signed and MOU which I believe was subsequently approved by the wicb board of directors.


you expect Dave to do away with that document and revert back to the old MOU (without the board approval) because the players claimed that Wavell didnt have the mandate to act?

doest it work like that?

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 15:37:13 

A player, who chose to remain anonymous for fear of victimisation, said the players never received any notice of that intended meeting which the WICB referred to in a ten-point October 17 media release
rolleyes rolleyes

 
nick2020 2014-10-22 15:37:41 

In reply to Pacy

1. There is no single person to blame.
2. Once the patient is alive there is hope.

Admin is spinning that Wi cricket has been dead for years but that is clearly untrue. If he said bed-ridden then I wouldn't argue that.

Truth is this notion that it is dead is questionable. Dead because we are not winning?

Were the custodians of our cricket ever competent?

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:38:58 

In reply to Cuter

When an employer is faced with the threat of industrial action by his employees that would cripple his company he does what is necessary to save his company with utmost haste.

Risk to benefit all the time Cuter.

 
Commie 2014-10-22 15:39:40 

In reply to imusic

I have to work with you a bit on these.

Everything is there, but you havent got a punchline or a strong localisation, which for a Trini is surprising, but for a diluted expat Trini isnt.

Apart from all of that...good effort.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 15:40:25 

In reply to Cuter

you expect Dave to do away with that document and revert back to the old MOU (without the board approval) because the players claimed that Wavell didnt have the mandate to act?

doest it work like that?

Ordinarily no.

But you don't act pedantic and talk bout process when shit going down

As a leader, you need to see the big picture. The big picture has opened before our eyes and it ain't pretty. It could have been prevented.

It appears that those in charge didn't really believe the players would abandon the tour...especially in India where many of their main players make their living.

That miscalculation has us where we are today

 
carl0002 2014-10-22 15:41:01 

In reply to Courtesy

But that not making sense.

If that is accurate. If Wavell went back to the WICB and Cameron sent him away, why would Bravo turn around calling on the WICB to intervene, WIPA no longer representing them etc.

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 15:43:11 

In reply to Courtesy

but would Dave have the authority to just go to India and tell the players yes, let use the old MOU for the series.

 
hubert 2014-10-22 15:43:23 

In reply to imusic


Litigation seems the obvious route and changes will result in both bodies.
We all just have to wait and see.
I would like to see the bylaws / constitution of WIPA if such exists

 
WestDem 2014-10-22 15:43:28 

In reply to Courtesy



Thanks!


The players wanted this to be beefed up to make up the shortfall or at least not to have them severely disadvantaged.


WOW!!! Look like dem bwoys also paying Dave and de CEO Salaries also with this new MOU...

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:44:54 

In reply to carl0002

Remember, there was little or no communication with the players.

They were all desperately trying to have something said to them but to no avail.

Imagine players having two hours sleep waiting for some form of communication before the fourth ODI.

Man put yourself in the players' shoes.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 15:45:42 

In reply to Cuter

If he didn't have it he could've obtained it as needed from the directors (informally) and ratified later

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 15:45:48 

In reply to imusic

But you don't act pedantic and talk bout process when shit going down

As a leader, you need to see the big picture. The big picture has opened before our eyes and it ain't pretty. It could have been prevented.

It appears that those in charge didn't really believe the players would abandon the tour...especially in India where many of their main players make their living.

That miscalculation has us where we are today


I totally agree

 
Admin 2014-10-22 15:46:11 

In reply to Commie

But imusic not that far off from exactly what happened.

_r

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:46:47 

In reply to Cuter

OK. Where would that authority come from...isn't it from fellow board members?

Call a damn conference call meeting.

 
hubert 2014-10-22 15:46:59 

In reply to carl0002


If Wavell went back to the WICB and Cameron sent him away, why would Bravo turn around calling on the WICB to intervene, WIPA no longer representing them etc


Because the WICB told them that they,the Board would only deal with WIPA (Wavell) lol lol
Reminds me of the song ' There is a hole in the bucket'. lol lol lol
Who in this case is liza ?

big grin big grin big grin big grin

 
Pacy 2014-10-22 15:47:44 

In reply to nick2020

Were the custodians of our cricket ever competent?


Never were and I agree with you. This time again it is more to do with their negligence and incompetence.

As a Fan I am completely unhappy that the matches against better opposition were lost (Particularly after the 1st ODI). I am unhappy that WI as a brand is being ridiculed by everyone around. Manjrekar in Ten Sports that day was saying that it is good that WI aborted since atleast India can play against better opposition (Sl) to prepare for the WC. It hurts.

I can expect or hope the players are more mature... But the Buck stops with the WICB who are supposed to manage the Brand WI Cricket.

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:48:30 

In reply to hubert

At least Liza showed up home when will was mentioned.

lol lol lol

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 15:48:59 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

If he didn't have it he could've obtained it as needed from the directors (informally) and ratified later


we not talking about simple agreement.

we talking about a document which has financial implications in the millions

 
Commie 2014-10-22 15:49:11 

In reply to Admin

Close to it I guess.

Brinkmanship is a dangerous ting.

The players didnt intend any of this imo.

They didnt advise themselves.

This was Dave vs Dinas 223.

No maturity.

 
hubert 2014-10-22 15:49:18 

In reply to Pacy


But the Buck stops with the WICB who are supposed to manage the Brand WI Cricket.


That is whole hog. and the beat goes on rolleyes

 
carl0002 2014-10-22 15:50:58 

In reply to Courtesy
So hold on when these players get pulverized they don't lose any sleep but sitting up all night waiting to hear about money issues b4 a game. I assume by now they not sleeping at all, cuz no money on the way.

Perhaps if Bravo did not have Dinas writing all dem letters and posting it in the public domain he would have been able to get hold of Wavell.

I am not buying that bs about cant get hold of anybody. The players was listening to the puppet master and they had their blue print.

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:52:53 

In reply to carl0002

So hold on when these players get pulverized they don't lose no sleep but sitting up all night waiting to hear about money issues.

Perhaps if Bravo did not have Dinas writing all dem letters and posting it in the public domain he would have been able to get hold of Wavell.


You have moved into another realm with Courtesy lagging far behind.

big grin

 
imusic 2014-10-22 15:53:23 

In reply to hubert

Reminds me of the song ' There is a hole in the bucket'. lol lol lol
Who in this case is liza ?

You lissen to Lloydie & the Lowbites too? lol

 
Chrissy 2014-10-22 15:55:30 

In reply to imusic

Nice ton dis lol

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 15:55:30 

In reply to Courtesy

one more question


had wicb reverted back to the old MOU as per the players request .

would the new MOU still be valid after this decision?

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 15:57:54 

In reply to Cuter

The courts have ruled on the old MOU. It's dead.

WICB would simply be applying similar figures in the interest of the survival of the tour and to show some goodwill.

It's like a normal contract between two parties using figures from a previous document or get approval from board members to use a similar figure from anywhere.

No big thing.

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 16:01:19 

In reply to Courtesy

yes I get that

but that would be in conflict with the new MOU

 
hubert 2014-10-22 16:02:08 

In reply to imusic


That's entertainment lol lol lol lol

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:03:08 

In reply to Cuter

He would have been insulated from the approval gotten from the conference call board meeting.

Or at the very least even if he did not get the approval from the other directors he would have covered his arse.

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 16:04:34 

In reply to Courtesy

can the players now claim that because of this decision (to revert) the wicb cannot go back to the new mou?

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:05:39 

In reply to Cuter

The old MOU is dead. It's at Crick's Funeral Service.

The players understood this clearly. Repair the new one.

big grin

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 16:07:12 

In reply to Cuter

The new one would've been DOA

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 16:08:12 

In reply to Courtesy

I know

but you not answering.

let me make it simpler.

can the decision to revert, give players a loophole to kill the new MOU smile

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:09:02 

In reply to Cuter

As they indicated the new one needs repair.

big grin

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 16:09:45 

In reply to Courtesy

hmmmmmmm


I rest my case smile

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 16:11:05 

In reply to Cuter

The minute Dave agreed to revert the new MOU is null and void in my opinion

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:11:32 

In reply to Cuter

But even without reverting to the old one the international players will attempt to repair the new one.

Film at 11.

 
Cuter 2014-10-22 16:13:21 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy


The minute Dave agreed to revert the new MOU is null and void in my opinion


and Dave would have consulted his lawyers first cool

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:14:39 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

No. The courts will determine whether the new MOU is null and void.

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 16:15:45 

In reply to Courtesy

...but until then it was de facto DEAD

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:17:22 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

You got legal advice from Conde?

big grin

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2014-10-22 16:19:15 

In reply to Courtesy

you would not have asked that when he was on your board wink wink wink

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:22:03 

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

lol lol lol

I heard him from the recording of the show last night and would not have worked for him or any board with him on it.

BTW, thanks Powen.

 
JOJO 2014-10-22 16:28:41 

In reply to Courtesy



WICB would simply be applying similar figures in the interest of the survival of the tour and to show goodwill


Here's the rub:

The (international) players are profit maximizers looking after their own interests;

The key income sources--sponsors; broadcasters--are profit maximizers looking after their own interests;

Yet, WICB is essentially a coop that is supposed to be all magnaminous, look after the intersts of cricket and all surplus FC cricketers, safeguard the interests of the governments, safeguard the legacy of the sport...


It cannot work. It will never work.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 16:32:39 

In reply to JOJO

Yet, WICB is essentially a coop that is supposed to be all magnaminous, look after the intersts of cricket and all surplus FC cricketers, safeguard the interests of the governments, safeguard the legacy of the sport...

So....they maximize THEIR profits and look after their own interests just like everybody else.

So what if they don't generate any revenue of their own? That's what the players and sponsors are there for

 
Courtesy 2014-10-22 16:34:33 

In reply to JOJO

This is why now they are now begging India, Australia, South Africa and ICC for a chance at survival.

Relenting to the players demands IMHO was a far better option than begging cup in hand.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 16:37:23 

In reply to JOJO

It cannot work. It will never work


And you know what's even sadder, the WICB already knows this. They have it in their 2011-2016 Strategic Plan that they crafted (see page 6 PDF).

They agreed it needs to change. They brought in Charles Wilkin to figure it out. The man worked hard and provided them with the blueprint (PDF).

Then they rejected it.

Let Wilkin explain himself:

1. The Governance Committee was asked by the Board of Directors to examine whether in its present form the structure of the Board can sustain the many changes the Board has by its Strategic Plan 2011-2015 undertaken to implement. Taking the request in all seriousness the Committee undertook the examination and recommended structural changes in accord with the commitments made by the Board in the Strategic Plan and to strengthen the capacity of the Board to effect that plan.

2. A key statement in the Strategic Plan is the recognition by the Board of the need to revise the method of appointing directors to move from a territorial based approach. The plan also accepts as a core value the promotion of the inclusion of critical stakeholders. We understood the latter statement to mean the inclusion of critical stakeholders in a meaningful not token way in the governance of West Indies cricket to recognize the fact that West Indies cricket is a regional asset.

3. At the special meeting of the Board in Barbados on Friday 14th September 2012 the territorial board directors flatly rejected the recommendations of the Governance Committee as to the restructuring of the Board and refused to make any change at all to the current structure.

4. Knowing full well that they wanted to preserve at all costs all of their positions on the Board, a conclusion I draw from listening to them for the whole day at Friday's meeting and at the earlier meeting in St.Lucia to which I was invited, the territorial board members should have spared the Governance Committee our valuable time and saved the Board the cost of the review exercise.

5. The blunt refusal of the territorial board members to follow their own stated principles casts serious doubt on their commitment to the rest of the strategic plan and their capacity to implement same.


And just imagine this story went largely unreported in the Caribbean rolleyes

This is why I say the players should keep getting them cheques. Every last dollar!

_ryan

 
Commie 2014-10-22 16:46:25 

In reply to Admin

The story was public.

The public in the Caribbean dont care. They have issues like findign work and getting their kids to school to worry about.

 
Admin 2014-10-22 16:49:17 

In reply to Commie

The story was public.


Tony Cozier wrote the only real story on it. All the other media wrote thumbs-up stories about the WICB accepting 10 of the 17 recommendations.

_ryan

 
Commie 2014-10-22 16:55:06 

In reply to Admin


WHo else out there is a cricket journalist ?

You realise most stories that had substance or any breakign news or analysis nature from the past came from CC.com ?

The story part of WI Cricket is really followed by expats. Just as most Americans wont give a f about a lockout but foreign fans who having withdrawal by TV will follow every inch.

I told you already. The millionaires vs billionaires thing lives.

Caribbean people in the region have no sense of affinity with either party.

 
carl0002 2014-10-22 16:56:30 

In reply to Admin
Someone said this to you yesterday but I go repeat.

The people in the Caribbean don't even resign when they mess up.

Good luck getting someone to restructure himself out of a work.

This is not unique to WICB for that matter.

Thats why they need to create these territorial boards as some kind of incorporated independent business units and get them out of the WICB as paid execs for these BU's. The quasi business/electable organization model not working and I am not sure how Wilkens plan would have been any different.

 
hubert 2014-10-22 17:01:04 

In reply to Admin



Thanks.
Very enlightening. Never saw it before so I now have a better informed. Nuff respect to Wilkin for his work ideas and savvy.
Truth is, after the Patterson reportI read very little of WI cricket except on Forum.
Hope CC Com is being rewarded bountifully in the tangible ways. smile

 
Admin 2014-10-22 17:02:04 

In reply to Commie

WHo else out there is a cricket journalist ?


Fazeer. Barry Wilkinson.

_ryan

PS: Oh right, sorry. That paystub thing. lol

 
Admin 2014-10-22 17:05:49 

By the way, lemme go on record with a shoutout to Lasana Liburd. He is doing good work at Wired868.com.

An example

_ryan

 
Chrissy 2014-10-22 17:07:28 

In reply to imusic

The pro-WICBC crew never sees anything wrong with the WICBC stance. afterall they are highly educated fellows just wanting to a buck to feed themselves and family


Yuh see it!!! lol

 
Kurt 2014-10-22 17:41:31 

I don't get all this flim-flam about had the WICB acquiesced to the players demands and paid the rates called out under the old MOU that it would have rendered the new MOU defunct. The WICB had 2 options to avert the cancellation:

1. Pay the players a "bonus" amount that would be in addition to that spelt out by the new MOU. The new MOU may specify the amount the players can expect but I sincerely doubt that it limits the WICB from exceeding that amount. Surely the WICB has a "rainy-day" account which could have been used for this purpose. Heck the BCCI would probably have chipped in as well.

2. Wavell & Cameron signed the new MOU. They can therefore sign a revision to this MOU. All they would have to do is add an addendum/revision that changes the commencement date of the MOU until after the India tour was over. That would reset all payments to the old MOU and allow time for the communication and negotiation that was clearly bypassed when the new MOU was signed.

By hiding behind the MOU, the WICB made a terrible decision. For the sake of about $500,000 they made themselves liable for a loss of $65,000,000. To paraphrase the words of the old knight who guarded the Holy Grail in the Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade movie, "They chose poorly".

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 19:21:11 

In reply to carl0002

If Wavell went back to the WICB and Cameron sent him away, why would Bravo turn around calling on the WICB to intervene, WIPA no longer representing them etc.
It is clear to me that Hinds and Cameron orchestrated the bad deal for the players. Bravo and the other players found it unbelievable/shocking that Cameron did not want to intervene when he was told that the players NEVER saw the final MOU that Hinds submitted to the WICB.

That is one of the main reasons the BCCI were siding with the players and was totally disgusted by Cameron/WICB devious actions.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 19:23:43 

Well....we've heard from ONE PLAYER

Any others?

 
sudden 2014-10-22 19:28:34 

In reply to Kurt

No Kurt yuh wrong. WIPA does not only represent test players. You can't just undo a contract that involve multiple parties without the permission of all without prejudicing one of the paries opening yourself to suits.

What he could have done is to indicate to the players that WICB is willing to void the MOU and renegotiate the MOU with the permission of WIPA which represents all the players

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 19:33:03 

In reply to sudden

You can't just undo a contract that involve multiple parties without the permission of all without prejudicing one of the paries opening yourself to suits
The MOU was not finalized by the players. Therefore the Cameron/WICB should never considered it valid.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 19:36:40 

In reply to Gupta

The MOU was not finalized by the players. Therefore the Cameron/WICB should never have signed it.

If I'm management and I supposed to be dealing with the Union rep and that rep is authorized to sign off on contracts on behalf of the union, why would I ask the union rep if they finalized the MOU with the players?

Dat come like the Union rep asking the authorized signatory on behalf of the board if they spoke to the BOD and got approval for the MOU.

It's a reasonable assumption to make by both parties. Good faith bargaining I think is the term

 
billydred 2014-10-22 19:42:55 

In reply to Kurt

BCCI illing to lose $65 million, when they could pay WICB the difference. I can't believe its cheaper to sign Sri Lanka than pony up the half mil to save the series. BCCI and the anti-Hinds players should be charged with match fixing, because some of those outs in the 4th ODI were very fishy. Cricket is dead 'Cricketainment' is alive and well. Not too far behind professional wrestling.

 
sudden 2014-10-22 19:51:21 

In reply to imusic

Correct itito. There is still some hope for you

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 20:05:18 

In reply to imusic


why would I ask the union rep if they finalized the MOU with the players
When millions $$$ is at stake a good management ensures that the process is complete and fair. They wouldn't allow a wayward rep to bring down their company. There is usually some legal clause signed by the union rep stating that the MOU he is presenting is accurate and agreed by the workers thru some fair process.

Hinds promised the players the MOU to review before it was submitted to Cameron. He never gave them. Many of the items discussed/agreed at the players meeting were changed substantially. The senior players told Cameron about the changes but he refused to have any discussion with them. That is plain arrogance.

 
imusic 2014-10-22 20:17:01 

In reply to Gupta

They wouldn't allow a wayward rep to bring down their company

Why would the WICBC think he's wayward? Unless......

There is usually some legal clause signed by the union rep stating that MOU he is presenting is accurate and agreed by the workers.

What makes you think that clause isn't present?

Hinds promised the players the MOU to review before it was submitted to Cameron. He never gave them. Many of the clauses agreed at the players meeting were changed substantially. The senior players told Cameron but he refuse to have any discussion with them. That is plain arrogance.

Perhaps Hinds and krew were so anxious to put their own stamp on the negotiating process that this quote below became the focus at the expense of all else:

History will record which set of administrators was able to get a new agreement signed

The bottom line is that a new agreement has been signed which holds both the players and the board accountable - which can only be a good thing.

That it has happened without the accustomed hullabaloo may not be good for the warring factions on cc.com....but must be good for what is left of West Indies cricket.

 
sudden 2014-10-22 20:18:04 

In reply to Gupta

But they could have only found out after the fact.

Do you think an employer negotiating with a union representing its employeres should before agreeing certain employment issues with the union ask the employee if that is what they agree to?

 
Commie 2014-10-22 21:01:30 

In reply to sudden

Do you think an employer negotiating with a union representing its employeres should before agreeing certain employment issues with the union ask the employee if that is what they agree to?


its been a long day but I am sure punctuation exists for sentences like these.

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 21:13:47 

In reply to imusic

Why would the WICBC think he's wayward? Unless......
Unless..mmmh..Hinds and Cameron orchestrate..collaborate..conspire on the deal?.. rolleyes rolleyes

 
Gupta 2014-10-22 21:18:40 

In reply to sudden

Do you think an employer negotiating with a union representing its employeres should before agreeing certain employment issues with the union ask the employee if that is what they agree to?
No but it is in the employer's interest to make sure what they receive is accurate. If some employees claim voting fraud or some kind of irregularities, good management would look into it.

 
Runs 2014-10-22 22:18:14 

Wavell negotiated MOU without their consent and they were told about the changes when already in India. As Christine says some are not too bright, and as my grandfather used to say trust but verify, should never go on tour without a signed contract. Incompetency by WICB and WIPA, they needed to have stepped down since yesterday. Damn us West Indians look inept, foolish and duncy. cool

 
Yamfoot 2014-10-22 22:38:13 

Thank you, thank you, thank you, for not clouding this important thread with tangential stuff like is normally the case.

Having said that, I just want to add my two cents.......

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!



rolleyes wink lol cool