Ken Borland

South African cricket has lost its position of influence in the global game according to both the Cricket South Africa (CSA) Interim Board and the minister of sport, which is part of the reason they have been treated with such disdain by Cricket Australia (CA).

CSA have lodged an official complaint against CA with the International Cricket Council (ICC) over Australia’s failure to honour their commitment to a Test tour that was meant to start on February 24, ostensibly due to fears over Covid-19. But South African cricket, now represented by the acting president of the Members Council, Rihan Richards, have reportedly lost their voice in the ICC hallways of power so it would be no surprise if their calls for compensation fall on deaf ears.

“South Africa have always enjoyed a position of prominence in international cricket, but of late it seems their standing is the opposite of that,” sports minister Nathi Mthethwa said in his opening comments during a virtual report-back session with the Interim Board on Friday.

“CSA has lost its place of prestige in the ICC, which is no surprise because there has been so much internal struggle in South African cricket and therefore a lack of focus on affairs at the ICC. That has allowed an imbalance in world cricket and we have a long way to restore our reputation.

“CA has been referred by us, but there are hints that The Big Three might reform themselves. CSA needs to get their house in order in order to return to a position of influence,” Interim Board member Haroon Lorgat, a former CEO of the ICC, added.

Dr Stavros Nicolaou, the chairman of the Interim Board, said the likely complete cancellation of the Australian tour showed CSA needed to work on establishing stronger relationships with countries like India.

“I’m not sure we’re going to be able to postpone the Australian tour to a suitable date even though we consulted widely with their medical team and their medical experts. The balance of power in international cricket has been brought into question. We need to strengthen our strategic position and we ned to tap into our other relationships with India, for example through BRICS.

“There was extensive consultation with CA and we made significant upgrades to our biosecure bubble, acceded to all of their demands. Then at the beginning of the month they advised us the tour would not proceed which was extremely disappointing. They said we had hit the peak of our second wave and our strain was more virulent, but on the day they notified us, we had a 75% reduction in cases and our strain is not more virulent but more contagious,” Nicolaou said.

Mthethwa also said he has full confidence in the Interim Board and their ability to deliver the AGM in the next couple of months.

“The Interim Board has not disappointed us, their initial appointment was for three months from October but we made provision to extend that and we are satisfied with the work they have done. The Interim Board understands the importance of transformation and they are not compromising on that. Some delays in their work have not been in their control, such as disciplinary processes.

“But I have full confidence in the Interim Board, they have been reporting to me and I am confident that the stance they have taken in disciplinary matters is according to the book, I have no fears about that. It is concerning though that there are these distractions that are trying to take our eyes off the ball. But I am glad that the Interim Board is consistently focused on the task at hand,” Mthethwa said.

Nicolaou committed the Interim Board to completing their work in the next two months.

“The implementation of the Nicholson recommendations are our most important task, to modernise, strengthen and enhance CSA’s governance. Professor Michael Katz, the foremost expert on that, has been given the mandate for that and has shared an amended MoI with us. That needs to be agreed to by the Members Council at a special general meeting which we envisage happening in the first two weeks of March.

“That will provide the platform for us to go to the AGM, which we anticipate happening between April 10-17, when a new permanent board, and an appropriate gap between them and the Members Council, and a new era for cricket will be inaugurated. But we have no control over the timing of disciplinary processes, they are both objective and independent, and postponements and delays are not unexpected,” Nicolaou said.

–

Given the financial crisis at Auckland Park, it is easy to attack the SABC for their coverage of cricket, but an incident during the third Test between the Proteas and Pakistan at the Wanderers got me thinking about the influence of SuperSport in South African cricket.

I have an early disclaimer to make – I used to work, on contract, at the broadcaster and I do believe South African sport would be much worse off were it not for the millions of rands SuperSport pumps into the various codes through broadcast rights.

But there is also an unseemly, monopolistic and dictatorial element to this relationship.

I experienced it first-hand when I happened to call Tony Greig a “loudmouth commentator” in an opinion piece I wrote for their website. The instruction came from on high from Imtiaz Patel, now the executive chairman of MultiChoice and apparently still ruling with an iron fist from Dubai, and I was told in no uncertain terms that I had to withdraw the article and send Greig a written apology.

I was tempted to use the famous apology former English fast bowler Andy Caddick once received from a West Indian journalist, who described him in his report as being “the big-eared Caddick”. The cricketer stormed into the media centre, found the journalist and demanded that an apology be printed in the next edition.

The apology was indeed there – “I am sorry that Andy Caddick has big ears”.

Last week’s incident also involved a commentator, but one that generally chooses his words with a lot more purpose than Greig did – Mark Nicholas.

The Englishman said on air on the first day that their lunchtime chat, which is sadly not easily accessed by those at the ground, on the second day would be with three South African legends of the past – Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards and Mike Procter.

Many viewers waited with huge anticipation for the interview – and we must remember that there is massive overseas interest in those three greats – but then there was nothing. The whole idea was quietly canned and never happened. SuperSport should have at least informed the public as to why what appeared to be a major snub had happened. Even Pollock, Richards and Procter were left in the dark.

Apparently, the interview was pulled due to one of those instructions from on high, seemingly because Cricket South Africa’s response to anything Richards has to say these days is akin to that of my wife when she discovers a Parktown Prawn in the house.

So instead of serving their viewers, and allowing cricket fans to enjoy a good chat with three of the greatest players ever, SuperSport preferred to score some cheap political points.

SuperSport have a terrible attitude when it comes to their responsibility as the most powerful media house in the country. They will avoid even the slightest hint of criticism aimed at the sports bodies that give them the broadcast rights, bending over backwards to fulfil every little wish of the administrators. Many of whom should be subjected to the harshest media scrutiny of all.

Cricket South Africa, who were captured themselves by the Guptas, have SuperSport captured although it is a more mutually beneficial relationship. But does it benefit the sport in the long term?

SuperSport have some very good broadcasters and journalists and they should be allowed more freedom to do their jobs. Certainly someone as experienced and sharp as Nicholas was highly unlikely to allow anything embarrassing to be said.

Instead, the embarrassment is all SuperSport’s now with their absurd banning of three absolute cricket greats, admired the world over.

https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-citizen-gauteng/20190119/282656098637360

Despite their dire mismanagement of the postponed T20 Global League, Cricket South Africa (CSA) look set to take on the South African Cricketers’ Association (Saca) in the new year in a bid to weaken what they perceive as the players’ undue influence on the game in this country.

Speaking with CSA president Chris Nenzani alongside him, acting CEO Thabang Moroe said on Wednesday that CSA would be pushing towards plans to dictate to the Proteas what franchise they should play for and to renegotiate the revenue-sharing deal which has been in place with the players for several years.

Given the level of uncertainty surrounding the majority of players in South Africa, and the numerous lucrative offers they are tempted with from overseas, any aggressive moves by CSA are likely to antagonise their most valuable assets and chase them away to greener pastures.

“The Proteas need to be allocated to franchise teams or there could even be a draft system. We want all our Proteas to participate domestically. We were very happy with the RamSlam T20 Challenge, but it could have been even better if all the Proteas were playing at once in different teams.

“Change is definitely needed and it’s unfair on those unions that work so hard to develop players and then lose them, what are these franchises doing in their own provinces? We might not even consult Saca. The players are our employees and in the corporate world, when you are an employee, you just get an e-mail saying ‘this is the new direction, this is the way it’s going to go’.

“A trade union doesn’t have a say in our view of how our company should be run and how we engage with trade unions. There is no room for a union to intervene if CSA decide to go in a different direction. There is nothing to stop us from moving away from revenue-sharing. CSA makes the money for cricket in this country and not the players’ union,” Moroe said in Port Elizabeth.

When asked about how much money CSA had lost due to the postponement of the T20 Global League, Moroe could not resist another attack on the players.

“The money we spent on upgrading facilities has not been lost, the money we spent on buying the trophy has not been lost. The only money we’ve lost is what we paid to players for not even bowling a ball,” he said.

Moroe and Nenzani defended the board’s handling of former CEO Haroon Lorgat and his failed business plan for the T20 Global League, saying they had to resist the urges to interfere until it became absolutely necessary.

“We had management that had performed extremely well in the past and the board had complete trust in them. They drive the projects and the board does not want to interfere in daily operations, but we do get regular reports. We only became uncomfortable with the details in June/July,” Nenzani said.

https://citizen.co.za/sport/south-africa-sport/sa-cricket-sport/1769502/1769502/