Message Board Archives

I've said before jokingly that the wicb is a private entity and they have a right to decide who they employ and what they pay...

What right is an employee to ask a company what amount they are getting for a project?

An employee can ask for a better deal but can they decide what is to be paid?

I suppose it's not that simple.

In reply to doosra

It appears the best thing to do is let the ICC and FICA negotiate.

After all the WICB does not generate its coin and if most of the players are not WIPA then there can be no collective bargaining.

u19 cricket just became more important

In reply to Commie

Ceo 2nd response noted "with assistance from ICC and FICA"

That's interesting

In reply to doosra

Well if the players are being represented by their agents, it is they who will play hardball. Not sure how FICA and ICC perceive agents but that is another complexity.

Is Muirhead being factual re fica/wipa involved in negotiations? That players were notified since 2015?

If no the players should state that.
And no player PERIOD should accept selection.

If yes why players wait till now to react? Is it they believe this gives greater leverage? And why didn't wicb not seek confirmation of acceptance earlier. .. although they may have been relying on wipa to provide that. ...should they?

Nuff questions. ..few answers!

In reply to Commie

Ceo said info was shared last may.

Is that true? If so did Wavell keep the info or did he just share it with his membership which is the correct thing to do

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

See above.

If Wavell shared it with membership then the 14 would not know

In reply to doosra

That would be foolish but i am sure that 14 would have at least heard anecdotally.

Also didn't CEO say 4 or 5 players were involved?

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Brinkmanship.

Somewhere Julian Hunte is feet up, watching a Twitter feed explode

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Given that the squad was selected a short time ago....its not like they had weeks..months to understand and reply to the new state of affairs.

It would look pretty stupid to query protest when u not e en sure u r on the squad....in fact ...that would guarantee your non selection by the schoolyard bully....

In reply to Commie

What say might agents have in all of this

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

4 or 5 could mean 3 or 4 not in this 15

In reply to johndom90

Neat. So info was known possibly before but no room to swing. Especially that they couldn't go to wavell

In reply to doosra

Agents advise their clients on their contracts. Many of the players are represented by one or two agents.

In reply to johndom90

I disagree. They could have made their concerns know before team selection...but I guess individualism trumped collectivism. It only becomes a problem when I am personally affected. ..every man fight for himself.

I agree with Sammy that all prize money should be given to the players. I believe that is the real intent of prize money and it is a good incentive.

In reply to doosra

As an employer you cannot reasonably expect your employees to merrily accept a 50% pay cut and still work. Especially workers with options. Now if you are face with shrinking revenue you openly discuss it with your employees if you are intent on keeping them with you.

In reply to Jabari18

In reply to doosra

Your argument is simplistic because it does not acknowledge the specific context of national sporting bodies, in particular national cricketing bodies. They are not exactly like private entities in the strictest sense of the word. They are fuelled by national sentiments, they inspire strong passions, they unite people and cultures, they foster tthe deepest sense of participation and commonality within countries- which bank or car manufacturer or social club or other private body does that?

Hence they cannot be treated like other private bodies and hence your employer employee comparison does not hold entirely. We can approximate them to private bodies but they are not exactly the same.

Mind you this is separate from the other arguments on this and other threads, i.e. who is right or wrong, what WICB did, what the players did etc. I'm not debating that, only your private entity comparison.

In reply to Verstehen

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think you make sense of course but...i'm still searching for literature or stories of similar sorts that may have a deeper theoretical foundation that could explain or describe this relationship more universally.

The crux of the matter , in my opinion is this .Is it fair to employees that
they should accept less money now , than they got , the last time they were
employed to participate in the same version of the Game ???

The Players who are not members of
WIPA , must state when they were Officially notified , regarding their
Salaries . This also applies to the WICBC .

The WICBC cannot claim to be ignorant of the fact that 14 of the Players it selected were not Members of WIPA ;
BECAUSE THIS IS PUBLIC kNOWLEDGE .

Once again the WICBC finds it self in the Spotlight for the Wrong Reasons . Frankly Cricket in the Region cannot keep having these problems .

The WICBC as I have stated in this Forum on several occasions , is a
Cancer on Cricket in the Region . This Cancer has its manifestation in
its 89 years old Structure ; which it
bluntly refuses to change , while
commissioning several Reports and then rejecting the salient features of these Reports .

In essence the WICBC has foisted a
series of Charades on the General
Public , because it has demonstrated
that it has absolutely no intention to change its current Structure that
was put in place in 1927 .

In reply to WestDem

True. It is like owning a professional painting shop and then shafting your most recognizable painters.

In reply to WestDem
How much revenue the WICB product generate as opposed to how much it is subsidized by the big 3.

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Speakers who speak out ha ve a hx of being shunned blacklisted, not selected, banned, prima donnad etc.

The biggest baddest indovidual always was and will be the WicB ...in its current form .

The only reason West Indies cricket is tolrrated rigjt now is for voting support and how wellllll we enforce the spirit of the game.

In reply to Verstehen

In reply to Fivestar

Only the retained players are employees. The others are independent contractors at this point.

In reply to Commie

You think the ICC will want to be part of this nonsense? Players abandoning a Union that the players voted in? Twice?

We are quick to point out the competencies or lack thereof of the WICB but what about the players?

The problem then is these players should not be representing West Indies cricket. The players who are fine with the Union should be.

In reply to Commie

As far as the WICB is concered they are all 'employees' who must obey the orders of the 'employer' and sign those contracts by Sunday.

In reply to nick2020

So if you think the union is no longer working in your best interest you should just stay quiet, pay your fees and keep on working?

In reply to Commie

Missing in all this debate is, if the CEO is telling the truth, can the wicb afford to pay the players at the same rate as last world cup?

In reply to Jabari18

In reply to Jabari18

But a union's strength or weakness is in the numbers. 15 can't overrule 90

In reply to nick2020

I know plenty people who voted for Manning, twice then demanded his head. And plenty people who voted for Kamla and demanded her head. And a sure plenty people that voted for Rowley will be demanding his head soon.

The you/your in the sentence earlier is the hypothetical players

In reply to Jabari18

True...but it takes a majority to overturn wipa

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

The Union is in a mess

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

It is jackassery at its highest level. I well understand the issue and I know the fools of this forum - you know who they are - will start talking about "who dem come fi see" but we need to get rid of this rotten, self-serving attitude.

In reply to Jabari18

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

14 out of 15 selected players are not represented by WIPA because they do not think the Union is acting in their best interest

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

In reply to Jabari18

In reply to Jabari18

In reply to Jabari18

But none of that 14 is contracted by wicb on retainer. Its the 90 under contract that have the say about wipa's actions.

If you not part of it you have no say in its actions

In reply to nick2020

i will not expect anyone to work for 75% less without complaining.

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Blame the WICB. Should have never picked them.
Like when Chrissy said they should have never boarded the plane.

In reply to openning

Who'll provide the money to make the players happy. ..if the CEO is telling the truth

In reply to nick2020

Did they read it in the 11th hour or receive it in the 11th hour?

Don't pick them. That will definitely benefit the West Indies *sarcasm*

In reply to Jabari18

Agreed. But that may well happen. They wouldn't play

In reply to Jabari18

I welcome anyone to voice his/her opinion. So what is the next step? That is the pay. Take it or leave it.
If the ICC played a part in the negotiations it leaves the players in a weaker position.

In reply to Fivestar

Its an odd situation. Someone or both sides are not telling the truth.

Either way its incompetence and at worse case criminal that brinkmanship is again the chosen negotiation approach by both parties.

In reply to carl0002

In reply to Jabari18

Is this contract the same as the aborted Indian tour?

In reply to nick2020

I guess there will be no WC FL?

In reply to WestDem

You have less than little then.

The WICB is almost wholly subsidized by the ICC.

In reply to WestDem



You saying we won't field a team?

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Included in the new eight-year period are 18 ICC tournaments*, including two ICC Cricket World Cups (2019 and 2023), two ICC Champions Trophy tournaments (2017 and 2021) and two ICC World Twenty20 tournaments (2016 and 2020).

Commenting on the decision to name Star India and Star Middle East as its successful bidders, ICC Chairman Mr N. Srinivasan said: “We are delighted that our partnership with the Star group has extended to the next cycle of ICC Events. This illustrates the strong relationship we have built in the current cycle and the value we have delivered since 2007.

“Star has an outstanding reputation as a sports broadcaster and has played an integral role in promoting and growing the game by taking coverage of ICC Events to a truly global and record-breaking audience, and we look forward to this continuing for another eight years.

“This commitment for the next eight years will ensure greater stability for ICC Members as well as increased funding for developing and established countries. Emerging nations will have access to the largest funding resource in the history of the game and the Board has fully endorsed this framework as the best means of safeguarding the future of the sport.

“The level of investment committed by Star shows that the game is stronger than ever before and hopefully with this financial stability for the next eight years, we can implement plans to strengthen and grow the game further, making it an even bigger and better global game.”

In reply to Commie

The ICC Revamp of the future tours programme was approved at the ICC Board Meeting held on February 8th 2014 and
this paved the way for bilateral tour arrangements between Full Member Countries. The Revamp
enables Full Members to benefit from a larger share of the ICC Revenues generated from the sale of
rights for the next eight ( years covering the ICC Events scheduled to take place from 2016 to
2023.These events include two (2) ICC Cricket World Cups, two (2) ICC World Twenty20 events
and two (2) ICC Champions Trophy events. The expected earnings of the Board will increase
significantly over the earnings for the previous eight ( years rights sales for 2007-2015.

In reply to WestDem

A bigger pot means more for everyone as stated by the ICC.

Dave & Wavell raided that pot to the tune of US$270,000/month for the PCL.

In reply to WestDem

Why you doing all that gymnastics.

Read page 7 and 8.

The part which says that key to being a going concern is the assumption of revenues from the next ICC cycle and the 2015 ODI WC.

In reply to Commie

If it's necessary to do the World Cup on the cheap, then don't pick players who will demand premium play.

Violence should be done to Muirhead for daring to suggest that players are represented by a body that they have disavowed. That is downright disrespectful, and unprofessional. Kudos to Sammy for managing to keep a civil tone in his next response to Muirhead.

In reply to Larr Pullo

I agree that they should not have picked anyone who didn't sign the contract.

It's a curious story because this cannot be the first time they are clashing on this.

Was this left for the public to declare a winner ?

In reply to Commie

They must be trolling the players....or the public, or maybe both.

Whenever these roadblocks appear the players always seem to be the empathetic ones rooting for public sympathy so the WICB, and rightly so are not competing in that game....

In reply to rubberd

How many months a year do they have to pay this $270,000?

In reply to Commie

But by law the WICB is required to negotiate with WIPA when it comes to players salary. It matters not that some players are not WIPA members. There is a collective bargaining agreement which strictly prohibits the WICB from dealing with anyone other than WIPA.

If the WICB were to negotiate with the individual player agents then they would be breaching the collective agreement and they would be staring an another potential defeat at the hands of an arbitrator.

What I find very interesting is that so many of the top players have left WIPA without fully understanding the consequences of that decision.

In reply to doosra

To make it simple

In the old days ( no other employers available)- you have to "bow" to be selected

it was take it or leave it

and of course, the players had to take it or starve.


Now there are other employers - the players will not starve if they leave it.

And that is why 7/8 years ago - the Pollards and the Gayles did not sign central contracts - so they don't HAVE to do it.

In reply to Verstehen

In reply to nick2020

You seem to be suggesting that it was the Players who selected themselves on the Team , and that in my opinion is not the case .

In reply to dax
You wrong, the WICB gets its importance by being a full member of ICC and as such is legally able to receive a subsidy from the ICC which it uses to manage a cricket product.

If not why don't you use your next paycheck along with A loan, call up the 15 guys who feel disenfranchised. Tell them you will pay them 135k US to play in the WC if they abandon the WICB and you will manage them. Its that easy right?

In reply to carl0002

Well said...nobody looks at this side

In reply to carl0002

I'm surprised the WICB hasn't said to the players "Go ahead and file a grievance against WIPA, your quarrel is with them and not us".


Surely the players know that the board cannot by law negotiate salaries with any other entity than WIPA. The players have put themselves in a legally bad position here when they gave up their membership to WIPA without securing a new collective bargaining agreement allowing the Board to negotiate with third parties such as their player agents.

In reply to SnoopDog

Very good point.

The board however is complicit in this.

They could have started the pr process since before Christmas by stating the contracts were not signed and that their selection policy was only to deal with contracted players.

Instead we have brinkmanship.

In reply to Commie

Yeah I see the brinkmanship you're talking about.


It's clear though that WIPA, as an player union, has lost confidence with its members. But this is for the players to sort out. This is their mess. They really should decide whether they want to keep WIPA, or form a new union and negotiate a new collective agreement, or each player negotiates directly with the board the way the Indian players do.

In reply to SnoopDog

In reply to SnoopDog

One agency represents about 5 of these players. It's not like they are going to have to speak to all these players.

This should be a simple exercise.

You don't want to sign and there is no compromise, WICB picks alternate players.

That should have happened ages ago.

In reply to Commie

Would you not negotiate with Sammy, Gayle, Bravo and others for this format selection?

In reply to SnoopDog

In reply to Narper

There's a sign up process and it includes fees

I suppose if u don't pay fees then you are out...

Wipa by laws anyone?

Where Josh when you need him

In reply to openning

That's what should happen.

They had a whole year.

why was a team named before the union ratified the contract, in any collective agreement the union return to members to vote on the agreement.

In reply to camos

These guys save one are not members of the union

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

And that one is probably Holder, WICB would have insisted that their captain must be a member of WIPA. Set the example.

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy


but even then, CEO stated that the union is the sole bargaining agent for players, so they the WICB should demand a ratified contract before they took the next step to naming team.

In reply to camos

So what if all wipa members voted to accept how would that bind the non wipa players

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

it gives the WICB cover and credibility .

The problem is that the WICB are practising divide and rule...they secured the support of the majority of WIPA members by arguing the case of cutting payments to WI players, in order to fund regional players' contracts.

But that's a pyrrhic victory...that has only succeeded in alienating your current players.

Until the WICB stops treating West Indies cricket as battlefield, there will be more casualties to come...and a West Indies cricket at war with itself cannot fight against external opponents.

In reply to mikesiva

Dont know too much about West Indies cricket inner workings, but this makes sense. Question is why are they allowed to get away with it? Why isnt the WICB held accountable? Why can they just do whatever they want, even if its not in the best interests of West Indies Cricket? This farce has been a slow motion train-wreck for years and nothing seems to be changing. Only difference is that the quality players have an alternative source of income and the WICB hasn't understood the leverage that it gives them.

In reply to NewsJunkie

The problem lies in the way the WICB was set up...it has its roots in colonial days, when the West Indies as a region was a colony of Britain. Then came the Federation, and the WICBC, as it was known then, fitted in perfectly with that structure. The WICBC would answer to the West Indies government, who were the representatives of the West Indian people.

But with the demise of the Federation, the WICBC felt that they answered to no leader of the new national governments in each island/territory. The unaccountability of the WICB(C) stretches back to the 1960s.

Take the athletics bodies in the various countries, such as the JAAA in Jamaica. In the end, the JAAA answers to the Jamaican people via the Jamaican government. If the JAAA treats the Jamaican govt and the Jamaican people with disrespect, then that board will be shunted out of power in next to no time.

That mechanism does not exist in the WICB, which operates as a law unto itself...as a result, the WICB has so alienated folks in the region that they have lost interest in the brand (West Indies), and are more interested in the national products produced by the CPL.

In reply to mikesiva

In reply to mikesiva

Thanks for the background info. Surely, the ultimate patrons - the west indies cricket fans and their govt representatives have to do something about this. Seems like structural reform in the WICB is long overdue. Regardless, they have been mismanaging West Indies cricket for far too long. Its a shame. Watching Joseph bowl against the Bangla boys reminded me how much Cricket is missing the west Indies flavor.

In reply to NewsJunkie

In reply to doosra

In reply to gvenkat

That's your opinion, and I have mine. call me nostalgic, I would enjoy having a strong windies team with tall fast bowlers whizzing the ball past the batsmen.

And then have some young Indian batsmen beat them with some class batting!

In reply to NewsJunkie

In reply to Larr Pullo

i'm guessing if you are not a member then they cant really represent you

they could argue that whatever benefits come out of negotiations all players benefit - member or not

looking for their bylaws cant find it

In reply to gvenkat

They doan scare me! Creatures dwelling in the glories of the past and refusing to respect their new overlords!

In reply to NewsJunkie

u cyah help u self eh

In reply to doosra

The was there to indicate I was joking. But some folks are just too damn sensitive

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

In reply to mikesiva

Most fans I know don't give a shit about the CPL beyond the lime. And it is a good lime with the majority of ppl going to eyeball peeps and have a party. Ask anyone what is the most memorable game last CPL and you will get a blank stare.

Stanford T20 came and went and not a mouse squeaked.

WI fans are quite frankly fickle as fuck these days because of all the years of having their hopes pounded. If WI wins a test or Odi series every man and his dog will confirm they are staunch WI fans for life.

It is what it is.

In reply to POINT

In reply to ducks

In reply to Jabari18

In reply to NewsJunkie

What did I tell you?