by RYAN PATRICK

West Indies players have finally received contracts from the WICB for Cricket World Cup 2007 but the absence of pension (Provident Fund) contributions has set off alarm bells among the cricketers.

The contract were sent to the players on Wednesday, March 14, 2007, a full week after the start of the tournament and more than a month after an arbitration panel headed by Barbados chief justice Sir David Simmons gave a binding ruling on how the $11.5 million World Cup pot should be split. Full Story

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com When will the WICB be taken out of their misery. They are beyond em·bar·rass·ing with their unprofessional antics.

Wesley

i doan know wot to think. ive been following this stuff on the google thing and the guy deyal has done a good job of defending himself and the board against ccc/ryan's claims.

i suppose i am reading these tings more critically these days....and from the get go when i see " has set off alarm bells among the cricketers."...i make some allowance for journalistic sensationalism.

im also sceptical when i see "sources say"....which sources? why are they unamed? and so on. also who told the board that they just couldnt change the amount/percent? so i guess i have more questions before i can take an informed position.

ps
small re edit is in order.

In reply to southward



Nothing new there.

_ryan

In reply to Admin

true, true...im usually an empty space...unlike u o great one. u always know wot to think.
:D

In reply to Admin
Who would have thought you would deal in hearsay? One writer called you the powerful
Editor from the Caribbean site, but you are no different than Uncle Tom Cozier objective
In the popular arguments where everyone will tap you on the shoulder and say well done.

In reply to Dreama

Are you claiming that there is untruth in the article? If you are then we're all ears. Your go...

In reply to hewesleyb



Man those guys never cease to amaze.

In reply to Admin Good job Ryan, you have now joined the ranks of the Powerful, congratulations.

same thing again. :roll:

damm :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

"the WICB sought several "clarifications" on the tribunal ruling after it learned that the expected $11.5 million -- which is paid to participating nations by the ICC -- might be significantly reduced.

The Simmons tribunal then told the WICB that it must be fully transparent and prove to WIPA that the amount is reduced. The board then submitted contracts to WIPA with the full $11.5 million figure."

Do the men of the WICB have no sense of moral decency at all? Does their word mean nothing at all?

Sources tell CaribbeanCricket.com the WICB sought several "clarifications" on the tribunal ruling after it learned that the expected $11.5 million -- which is paid to participating nations by the ICC -- might be significantly reduced.


good lord! that statement above in my interepretation means that the amount ($11.5M) was going to be reduced not by the wicb but by the icc.

come on people.

if my interpretation is correct (and i dont know that it is becos the more i read the article the more i am convinced that too much is left unsaid)--if my interpretation is correct then all the tribunal is saying to the wicb is that it is not enuf to say the amount is reduced...it must be proven/shown to all and sundry-in particular to wipa. the fact that the board submitted contracts with the full $11.5M simply suggests that the icc did not cut/reduce the amount.

the thing is we dont know and we are left to interpret becos the writer has not been explicit. again that whole statement starts with...sources say....again which sources?

the whole thing is riddled with question marks and is really an innuendo piece - far from responsible journalism.

the only thing i accept is the wipa statement which is in quotations.

It is understood that the WICB has unilaterally altered the match contracts, removing clauses that cover contributions to the Provident Fund, which serves as the pension plan for all West Indies cricketers.

According to the match/tour contracts for the recent ICC Champions Trophy and DLF Cup competitions (both one-off series that fall outside of the ICC's FTP), the WICB contributes 10% of its take to the Provident Fund. However, for this World Cup, the board decided it was not going to make the Provident Fund contribution.

The players signed the contracts under the condition that the Simmons arbitration panel will determine whether the Provident Fund contribution should be made.



look at the 3 para's above.

it starts "it is understood"....again there is an unnamed source behind that. but lets leave that...it goes on and uses the word unilaterally---thats v much a loaded/emotive word, it suggests that the wicb have acted excessively and heavy handedly...well we dont know if they were entitled to do that...the last para suggests that they might have been entitled to becos the panel will decide whether or not the contribution should be made. in other words its not clear cut.

but even more questions arise when scrutinizing the second para. the icc champions trophy and the dlf cup by the writers own admission were one offs falling outside of the normal where the wicb contributed 10% to the fund. well come the world cup it may just be that some other rationale guides the process.

again we dont know. the writer only leads us to x place without filling in the blanks.

as i said i dont know wot to think, so i am going to reserve judgement till i get answers to the missing blanks.

In reply to Admin
I hope yuh ready to face up to the possible heart attack and early demise of my good friend Kenny G. Do not get me wrong - I applaud you and I would do no different - but my heart is tough....yours seem to be soft...lately.

In reply to HumbleCalf


yuh tekking dis ting 2 far! :D