Ken Gordon on Lucky, WIPA, World Cup

Thank you Mr. President for the opportunity to speak to your Chamber on an issue which I know is as close to your collective hearts as it is to mine. My association with Barbados goes back a long way and I suspect that over the years I have been one of the more significant contributors to your airport departure tax revenues. In fact, I was reminded of this a few years ago by Sir Fred Gollop, Chairman of the Nation Group in an amusing aside, when on the occasion of that Corporation's 25th anniversary he calculated that I had visited Barbados on more than 200 occasions in 23 years.

Let me hasten to admit that those visits had nothing to do with cricket ? but they forged profound relationships which have been lasting and which, as a by-product, helped me to understand the passion with which the Barbadian views his cricket. So I speak to you today not as one who is attempting to wave a magic wand, but simply as one who shares your passion for the game. When that passion is combined with a lifetime of complications and business difficulties, it encourages a perspective that focuses on the possible, rather than that which is not.

That is the road we must travel if our difficulties are to be overcome. These problems must be turned into opportunities to effect required change and we must develop a positive attitude in addressing them, rather than remain consumed by the negatives.

That was my conviction when I accepted the invitation to have my name go forward as a candidate for the presidency of the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) and after seven extraordinarily long weeks in office, I remain more than ever convinced of that today.

LEAKS AND THE LUCKY REPORT

But before we discuss the future of West Indies cricket, my Barbados friends advise that it is necessary to clear up some of the issues which have recently been ventilated in the Barbados media ? first, the Report of the three-man Sponsorship Negotiations Review Committee chaired by Justice Anthony Lucky.

Controversial reports are fair game for the media and journalists would not be doing their jobs if they did not pursue them as aggressively as they can. We understand what happens in free societies where vibrant media exist. But deliberate leaks are a different matter, particularly where two Committee members considered it necessary to publicly distance themselves from such leaks.

Our even greater disappointment was with the chairman's decision to hand a copy of the Report to the Governments of the region without reference to the WICB which had appointed his Committee ? and which was meeting to consider the report in a matter of days. This action had no influence whatsoever on the Board's decision to publish for the need to do so was always clearly understood. But again, it was significant that the same two Committee members found it necessary to publicly disassociate themselves from such unusual behaviour. One wonders what impact such conduct will have on future Commissions of Enquiry.

The Report has now been published. Full and detailed responses have been given. Where we have differed with conclusions in the Report, we have done so on the basis of hard information and stated our reasons. Where we have erred, this has been openly admitted. Perhaps the most controversial conclusion with which we have differed was one which came not from the Committee, but from one member of the three-man team ? Justice Lucky ? who, in a minority view, stated that the Digicel contract was legally flawed and was therefore invalid.

The WICB's clear legal advice is that, and I quote: "The failure to obtain specific Board approval for the signing of the Agreement is a breach of Articles but it does not invalidate the Agreement." This is advice which we believe to be correct and we have been guided accordingly.

It must also be emphasised that the Committee, in its final paragraph, made seven recommendations. The WICB has accepted five of them and indicated that the other two will be addressed in the context of an organisational review. In fact therefore, not one of the recommendations has been rejected.

Admittedly, the package of our response was voluminous, for we took the Report seriously and all criticisms were addressed, but no one who reads these documents carefully can reasonably conclude that the Committee's Report was rejected. Those who insist on saying so have either not read our response or must have their own agenda for making such a statement.

The other issue which I am told has been extensively reported has been the resignation of the first Chairman of the Board of Directors of ICC Cricket World Cup West Indies 2007 Inc. Mr. Rawle Brancker's resignation is to be regretted for he gave freely and generously of his time. ICC Cricket World Cup 2007 is a very big business and strong individuals are required to run successful businesses. Sometimes there is strong disagreement over management styles and issues. When these cannot be resolved, resignations follow, for the success of the event must be paramount. What is of overriding importance is the process: that thoroughness and fairness to both sides be inherent in addressing these problems.

So let me clarify the following. When issues between the former Chairman and the CEO of the ICC Cricket World Cup West Indies 2007 Inc first blew up more than a year ago, every reasonable effort was made to resolve the problem, including the intervention of the then President of the WICB and the Deputy Chairman of ICC Cricket World Cup West Indies 2007 Inc. This led to appropriate apologies being offered by the former Chairman and a new beginning attempted.

I am advised that the CEO considered resigning at that time but was persuaded not to do so. More recently further serious problems arose. Tension mounted. This raised concerns for the success of the event and a special three-man committee headed by Ambassador Julian Hunte was appointed to make recommendations to address the situation. Meanwhile, a new President of the WICB was elected. At a meeting of the CWC Board of Directors some days later ? at which the Hunte Report was due to be considered ? I requested a deferment to better familiarise myself with the issues and this was approved.

By the time the meeting was held three weeks later in St. Kitts, I had held discussions with a number of Board members, including the President and Vice President of the WICB, the Chairman, Vice Chairman and the CEO of CWC Inc and the members of the specially-appointed committee. In all these discussions, I did not hear one charge of managerial incompetence, financial impropriety or the lack of accountability levelled against the CEO. To the contrary, his competence was generously praised.

What clearly emerged was that, in the light of renewed difficulties, the CEO had concluded that, given the history and current relationship with the Chairman, he felt that to continue would be to place the Event at risk. In fact, he stated he was prepared to make way and work behind the scenes to assist the effort, rather than continue in his position, and his resignation was made available to the Board of Directors and to the WICB which had appointed him.

It is relevant to explain that, on the day of the meeting, both Mr. Brancker and the CEO stated their positions very clearly before being asked to withdraw for the matter to be considered ? and this, it appears, is what the former Chairman found unacceptable.

After lengthy discussions the Board arrived at a unanimous view on what the next step should be ? but this was never conveyed to Mr. Brancker for, on his return to the room, he announced his resignation. For obvious reasons, I do not propose to discuss the details of what was said during those discussions but the men who sat in the boardroom that day are all men of the highest integrity with impeccable track records ? men who share a common commitment to West Indies cricket and its best interests. It would be ludicrous to suggest that Mr. Chris Dehring, or any other CEO for that matter, could manipulate such a Board.

Now I refer briefly to the suggestion that it is contrary to ICC rules that there be a common head of the CWC?s Board and that of the WICB. As certain as we were that this was not so ? on the chance that we may have missed something ? I requested that this be double-checked with the ICC. They have since reconfirmed that there is no conflict whatever and that the WICB is entirely free to appoint whomever it wants to run either or both Boards. The Host Agreement requires WICB to appoint a Managing Director, who needs to be approved by the ICC, to run the event. There is no requirement to set up a separate company and the decision to do so was an entirely Caribbean matter.

Then I am told that it has been suggested that the ICC will be looking more closely at the operations of the ICC Cricket World Cup 2007 and that there should be an audit of the affairs of ICC Cricket World Cup West Indies 2007 Inc. Given the virtual ongoing audit which is part of WICB's arrangement with ICC, for every major contract requires their approval and they monitor all significant developments, the following brief extract from the CEO of ICC in responding to recent events may be instructive.

Mr. Speed writes and I quote: ?The new Board will provide a valuable impetus for the next stage of the ICC Cricket World Cup 2007. I am very pleased with the outcome of your meetings and look forward to seeing your new directors in Montego Bay in November.?

Mr. President, I have addressed this situation with some regret. First, because of the event itself, and then because it is time we stop prolonging differences when there is so much to be done. But, I have been persuaded of the importance of clearing up these misunderstandings and I hope these comments have assisted in doing so.

When we look at the future of our cricket, we must begin with the acknowledgement that the short-to-medium term will be powerfully influenced by our success or failure in the 2007 ICC Cricket World Cup tournament. If we take the correct steps to prepare for this Event, this could set the pattern for programmed and systematic development, heighten interest and restore the game to the prestige it once enjoyed.

Already public recognition has been given to our planning by the ICC President who, in referring to the processes developed by CWC Inc., stated publicly in July that the ICC will in future use many of the sophisticated planning and delivery tools developed by our management team in future ICC Cricket World Cups. It is important to understand the significance of this, for the ICC Cricket World Cup is one of the largest sporting events in the world. At the South African event in 2003, 14 teams played 54 matches in 51 days in 15 venues. A total of 625,000 match tickets were sold with a global television audience of 1.2 billion viewers.

Our event in 2007 will be even bigger.

There will now be 16 One-Day warm-up matches and 16 teams playing 51 matches. It is expected that 800,000 match tickets will be sold with a television audience in excess of two billion.

These numbers speak for themselves.

Already there are 2,000 Caribbean persons involved with the Event through nine professionally-staffed Local Organising Committees (LOCs).

Transparency and accountability is institutionalised for the Event is governed by an ICC Host Agreement which establishes objectives and governs operations and policy.

Significant challenges are ahead to maintain the tight timelines and creating the type of buy-in which will avoid exploitation. This is particularly worrisome with accommodation. One hotel group with a regular room rate of US$180 per night has offered their rooms for the Event at US$900 per night. Fortunately, there are compensating patterns of behaviour, for another group has offered as many rooms as are needed for the Event at their standard rates. Thank you, Mr. Butch Stewart.

THE WICB/WIPA DISPUTE

Now I would like to talk about cricket which is what I had in mind when I accepted your President's kind invitation.

The problems which exist are not of recent vintage. They go back to the era when we dominated the game and thought that we would always continue to do so. There appeared to be an unending reservoir of talent which has always been, and continues to be, disproportionate to the limited numbers of our combined Caribbean population. Those who were charged with the responsibility of leading West Indies cricket at that time failed to understand that the other teams would not continue to lie down and play dead. It was predictable to all who thought about these things that they were on the hunt for answers. And they found them.

The Australians were first out of the blocks and the results are there for all to see. They have led the transformation of the game to one where rounded professionalism is the dominant factor rather than talent. Others followed ? but we continue to fiddle while the cricketing Caribbean has moved from tolerance to resentment to despair.

We find ourselves today in a situation which can be likened to what economists call the vicious cycle of poverty:

* We have a problem of leadership.
* A team performing below an acceptable standard and which clearly lacks the consistency and toughness which is so much a part of today's game.
* This situation has led to widespread public disenchantment.
* Our financial deficit has worsened.
* Financial constraints have led to major conflicts between the Board and players.
* We have resorted to playing a below-full-strength team in order to meet international obligations.
* The Board has lost credibility. Even when it takes principled and necessary decisions these are resisted by an unsympathetic and disillusioned public.
* And then of course, there is the Lucky Report.

It is almost as though we are in free fall. Our problems go beyond cricket. We have a monumental management problem and we have to address it as effective managements do all over the world.

Performance must be measured in terms of results rather than good intentions. The incremental step-by-step approach will, of course, continue to be necessary, for putting out fires will always be the responsibility of management ? but when confronted with a crisis that is not enough.

We need to find a cause: a unifying objective which is bigger than all the elements of the problem and which is attractive enough to capture the imagination of all stakeholders; a cause that will consume the other issues so that they will be seen in relationship to the ultimate objective rather than tugging us in so many different directions.

I am convinced that our objective ? our cause ? must be winning the ICC Cricket World Cup in 2007.

Of course, one's cause must also be credible. Let me tell you why I believe it is. Let's look at our team.

With perhaps two exceptions, our players are all very young men. They are malleable. Our numbers three, four and five in the batting order are collectively as good as or better than their counterparts in the cricketing world. Our senior opening batsman, who has a voracious appetite for runs, could have so much more ahead of him ? but he needs work. So too do our three leading fast bowlers who have all the attributes but need greater consistency and experience.

Then we have an outstanding all-rounder and a most promising wicketkeeper-batsman and there are others knocking at the door. These young men have demonstrated powerful talent, and I am pleased to note that this view is supported by no less a person than Sir Garfield Sobers. What they need is the toughening experience which can only come from a systematic and carefully planned programme of training: one designed to address their weaknesses and build their strengths.

I had the good fortune some months ago to have a serious discussion on cricket with some of the people involved with the administration of English cricket; one being a former English captain. It was their unanimous view that the single most important factor in transforming the English team, from a group of indifferent performers to the highly-professional unit they have become, was placing them under annual retainer-performance contracts. The logic is obvious.

Once contracted the team lives under the control of the coach who can identify their weaknesses, mobilise the resources to work with them to correct their problems, plan physical and mental toughening exercises, reinforce discipline ? a condition we treat lightly but which is at the heart of all success ? and build camaraderie as a way of life. The Australians and the English have demonstrated this method?s success.

Is there any reason why we could not achieve similar benefits from such an intensive programme? Now that we have pulled a team of current and former greats together in the Win World Cup Committee, to develop a carefully thought-through programme of training, is it unrealistic to expect the performance of these talented young men to be lifted by 20 or 25 percent by the time the ICC Cricket World Cup comes around in 2007? This is doable. And if we can do this we can win. First, we must develop the will. We have to lift our sights to look beyond the quagmire which threatens to consume us.

But, in the real world, this means first finding the money in order to offer full-time employment contract to our players.

We have therefore put a high-powered team in place to do so; a team headed by Dr. Grenville Phillips of Barbados, a man I have never known to fail. He is supported by equally effective men in William Lucie-Smith of Trinidad and Tobago, former head of Price WaterhouseCoopers, and Don Wehby, CFO of Grace Kennedy of Jamaica. They have been asked to report by the end of October. Much will depend upon their success, for the altered scheduling arrangements in fixing international tournaments have severely reduced the income flows to the WICB; this at a time when development costs which are so critical for younger players continue to increase.

We have therefore had to tackle the problem of finances on all fronts and have taken steps to review the cost structure of the WICB. A committee headed by Enoch Powell of Antigua has been charged with producing recommendations for cost saving across the widest possible front. They are expected to report by September 30th. Their terms of reference are:

1. Identify opportunities for reducing costs wherever possible.

2. Re-cast the Strategic Plan to make it relevant to the circumstances which exist.

3. Make such other recommendations that will improve the financial performance of the WICB.

But even as they pursue their mission, we must resolve the impasse which has led to so much bitterness between the players and the WICB. This remains our number-one priority.

I would be less than honest if I did not admit my disappointment that this issue has not yet been resolved. While our publicly stated target was the end of the year, candidly I had hoped to be in a position today to state that agreement had been reached. Unfortunately, this has not as yet happened but we remain resolute in our determination to find a solution.

Now that the players have accepted and signed the letters of invitation, we will do our part and remain committed to sending the best possible team to Australia. But if the issues being discussed remain unresolved by midday tomorrow, we will take alternative steps to find the answer. Some time ago it was suggested that the ICC be invited to nominate a mediator. If that avenue is acceptable to WIPA, then the WICB is prepared to pursue that option.

Let me end Mr. President by stating very clearly the objectives we have set ourselves for achievement by December 31st 2005.

1. Resolution of the WIPA impasse.

2. Introducing retainer contracts for a minimum of ten players in the West Indies team; that number to be increased as financial circumstances permit.

3. Implementing a clear plan of action for resolving our financial crisis so that we may proceed with our plans for development.

4. Having personal discussions with the Prime Ministers of the Caribbean cricket countries to ensure that they are fully briefed on our plans.

The task ahead is formidable but if we work together we can and will turn this ship around.

I do not interpret failure to find agreement as ill will on anyone's part ? nor disappointment as failure.

All this means is that we must try so much harder.