Ken Borland

Ill-equipped leadership is something which really hits a nerve when it comes to South African cricket, largely due to the incompetent and self-serving Board and CEO which the game here had to labour under between 2017 and 2019.

So it was distressing this week to see the new CSA Board suffer their first mis-step, showing the same sort of reactionary leadership of their predecessors rather than the proactive management that is required of a billion rand organisation.

The Proteas have been grappling amongst themselves with issues of a new team culture for these changing times, especially since Black Lives Matter has made such a dramatic impression on the global sports environment. And the anti-racism message of that movement should hit particularly near to home due to the notorious history of our country.

Unfortunately, the team have not been able to come up with a unified response to BLM. It has not been a good look to see some of the team kneeling, others standing; some with fists raised, some with hands by their side.

But the CSA Board has failed to provide strong leadership in this regard. It’s not as if this issue has suddenly sprung upon them. How to properly acknowledge BLM has been a problem for the Proteas for more than a year. A proactive board would have known the spotlight would be on the team at a World Cup and would have ensured proper engagement was held with the squad and a solution found before the tournament. The sort of engagement that happened on Wednesday night once the crisis was already in full swing.

Instead, like a poor captain moving his field around in response to a boundary being hit, CSA chose the ham-fisted route of not consulting and issuing a directive, on the morning of a crucial game.

The national team have had their fill of arrogant administrators having the audacity to run cricket as their own fiefdoms, and the timing of the edict, and the fact that it came out of the blue without any consultation, was bound to cause some push-back.

Quinton de Kock’s initial refusal to take a knee, even though he is a product of a mixed-race family, caused near hysteria in this race-obsessed country of ours. Personally, I believe it is the right thing to take a knee for Black Lives Matter, but what worried me more about De Kock’s actions was that he was willing to leave his team in the lurch, pulling out of a crunch game two hours before the start, because he was very annoyed at being forced to make a gesture.

But many of his critics should perhaps take the beam out of their own eye before they try to remove the speck in De Kock’s eye. How many of them are anti-vaxxers? Because that is a similar issue of personal freedoms versus common good.

How many of those who viciously labelled the 28-year-old as a racist would be willing to make a gesture when it comes to protesting Farm Murders?

Because in many people’s eyes, rightly or wrongly, Black Lives Matter is as politicised an issue as Farm Murders. Just as there surely can be no moral objection to Black lives mattering, surely all farm murders are wrong?

This is where education is so important. CSA should have sat down with the players a long time ago and explained exactly what Black Lives Matter means in a South African context and what exactly the team would be supporting and protesting against should have been thrashed out and finalised.

Cricket South Africa’s Board issued a directive on Tuesday morning that all Proteas players must ‘take the knee’ in support of the Black Lives Matter initiative against racism before their T20 World Cup match against the West Indies in Dubai, a move that was later confirmed as the reason for key batsman Quinton de Kock withdrawing from the match.

De Kock was a notable omission from the starting XI for what team management called “personal reasons”. The wicketkeeper/batsman has previously expressed his struggles with bubble life, but the timing of his withdrawal inevitably cause immense speculation and CSA issued a statement during the West Indies innings confirming that the former captain had made a “personal decision … not to take the knee”.

The statement said the Board will await a report from team management before deciding on “the next steps”.

The Proteas were fielding first and all the players on the field and the support staff on the side appeared to take the knee with their right fists raised.

CSA Board chairman Lawson Naidoo said he believed the Proteas needed to have a unified response to BLM, rather than the previous situation where some players were standing, others kneeling, some had fists raised and others didn’t.

“A commitment to overcoming racism is the glue that should unite, bind and strengthen us. Race should not be manipulated to amplify our weaknesses. Diversity can and should find expression in many facets of our daily lives, but not when it comes to taking a stand against racism.

“South Africans were recently joined by people across the world in celebrating the 90th birthday of our revered Archbishop Desmond Tutu. What better tribute from the Proteas to an icon of the struggle for freedom in South Africa than to demonstrate we are working to fulfil his vision of a united South Africa,” Naidoo said.

Former long-serving Proteas Mohammed Moosajee urged the board to implement a unified response to BLM by the Proteas when he testified before the Social Justice and Nation-Building hearings last week.

John Mogodi of Limpopo, Daniel Govender of KZN, Craig Nel of Mpumalanga, Tebogo Siko of Northerns and Simphiwe Ndzundza of Border are the people elected by the Cricket South Africa Members Council, the body that pushed the sport in this country to the edge of the precipice before eventually seeing some sense, to the new Board that will run cricket.

Of those five, it is fair to say Nel and Siko are the only two who have not been opposed to the efforts of the Interim Board and, by extension, the sports minister, to rescue cricket from being flushed down the toilet. While that reflects on the embarrassing quality of leadership on the Members Council, it is a relief that the new Board appointed this week will be dominated by eight independent directors and there is plenty of leadership, financial and legal expertise and governance experience amongst that lot.

Andrew Hudson, whose post-playing career has been centred on the banking world, is the only director with top-level cricket experience and it perhaps would have been nice if more former players had been appointed.

And the lack of female representation is an even bigger blot on the Board. Independent director Ntambi Ravele and acting chief financial officer Christelle Janse van Rensburg are the only two women out of a board of 15, and that’s even after sports minister Nathi Mthethwa made it clear that he wanted to see a greater push towards gender equality.

It is typical of the double-speak nature of the Members Council that president Rihan Richards should speak of their full commitment to greater female representation and then, when the vote was tied for the fifth non-independent director’s post between Anne Vilas and Simphiwe Ndzundzu, they chose the man.

And Ndzundzu is not just any man. He is president of one of the most dysfunctional provinces on and off the field, and someone who is being investigated over a charge of assault involving the elderly mother of a colleague he had a dispute with as well as a broken arm for his rival’s sister.

And Vilas is not just any woman. Acknowledged as one of the best administrators in South African cricket and very successful in business, as president of Central Gauteng Lions she has overseen their rise to arguably the best team in the country.

So it is fair to say that there will still be small pockets of resistance to progress in South African cricket, but hopefully our cricketing family can start to heal. CSA has been a dysfunctional organisation and the events of the last few years have demoralised so many people involved in the game. Good leadership was replaced by an environment of suspicion.

Hopefully this new Board can bring some much-needed stability after their predecessors did so much to kill the hopes and dreams of young cricket fans. Critical to that becoming a reality is for the right person to be elected chair of the Board and also whoever represents CSA at the International Cricket Council requires much thought.

It’s been a depressing time for those cricket lovers looking for moral leadership as the CSA Board and incompetent Members Council were captured by vested interests and a downright crooked culture developed in the running of the game. But this new, majority independent board will hopefully ensure good governance.

Cricket’s governance issues have, without a doubt, affected the on-field performance of the men’s national team as well, but after a lean period, the victory in the first Test against the West Indies provided some encouraging signs that the Proteas might just be regaining their mojo.

So let the healing begin, and thank you to the six members of the Interim Board for their top-class work which saw their vital task through to completion, shouldering a massive burden in the process.

Judging by the antics of the Members Council at Saturday’s Cricket South Africa AGM, local cricket fans can thank their lucky stars that there is now a predominantly independent Board that has been put in place to oversee the strategy and vision of the embattled organisation going forward.

In between clowning around in a meeting that has serious consequences for South African cricket and subverting the democratic process by trying to elect people by consensus rather than putting everything to a vote, the Members Council did also manage to object to one of the independent directors named by the Nominations Panel.

Advocate Norman Arendse can be an enormously controversial, divisive figure as he has shown in previous stints on the CSA board, and the Members Council were unanimous in their unhappiness with his appointment. Newly-elected CSA Members Council president Rihan Richards was vague about just why they objected to Arendse, other than to say he was the lead independent director when dismissed CEO Thabang Moroe was appointed and he has made derogatory utterances about CSA in his time off the board.

The Nominations Panel agreed to reconsider Arendse’s appointment, but according to Dr Stavros Nicolaou, the chairman of the Interim Board, they can consider input from stakeholders but can pretty much appoint who they like as long as they meet the eligibility criteria.

The seven independent directors that were confirmed on Saturday are Advocate Steven Budlender, a self-described cricket obsessive; former Proteas batsman and convenor of selectors Andrew Hudson; Simo Lushaba, who has a doctorate in Business Administration and has extensive experience on several boards; governance expert Lawson Naidoo, the executive secretary of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution; Andisa Ntsubane, a marketing and communications expert whose face is well-known in cricket circles through his work with major sponsors; former MultiChoice CEO Mark Rayner and Ntombi Ravele, a seasoned sports administrator who was involved in boxing, netball and tennis.

Ravele is the only woman on the board because the Members Council could not find it in their hearts or resolve to follow through on their oft-spoken belief in gender equality as they elected Border president Simphiwe Ndzundzu, who has been accused of breaking a woman’s arm with a knobkerrie when he went to a colleague’s house and attacked him and his elderly mother, ahead of Central Gauteng Lions president Anne Vilas.

Ndzundzu, head of a province whose financial situation is almost as disastrous as their on-field performance, and Vilas, in charge of arguably the most successful union in the country, found themselves tied for the fifth non-independent director’s position. Ndzundzu has also accused Vilas of being racist when she raised the allegations of his gender violence.

The four other non-independent directors elected are Daniel Govender (KZN), John Mogodi (Limpopo), Craig Nel (Mpumalanga), Tebogo Siko (Northerns).

Interestingly, neither Richards nor Donovan May of Eastern Province, who was elected vice-president of the Members Council, made themselves available for the Board. While Richards said this was “to ensure clear separation between the Members Council and the Board”, history suggests one will find it is merely an arrangement to ensure seven Members Council representatives share the gravy instead of just five.