Ken Borland

The first week of the Social Justice and Nation-Building hearings have been a mere aperitif for what I sense many people are hoping are more sensational revelations from next week when former players start appearing before Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza, the ombudsman appointed by Cricket South Africa.

But in many ways, this week’s “scene-setters”, as Ntsebeza has called them, have provided vital testimony because they have given a factual account of the transformation policies of CSA and how they have changed through the years. There have been successes, but there have been failures as well and surely no-one can question that the national team is not as transformed as it should be nearly 30 years after Unity.

The SJN commission did not have a promising start though. The first witness was Dr Eugenia Kula-Ameyaw, which was fair enough because the SJN was largely her idea. But the former CSA independent director produced a couple of hours of largely incoherent testimony riddled with factual errors. As a former Board member, how does she not know that the players’ association (SACA) don’t pay the players’ salaries?!

She then thought it would be appropriate to give Ntsebeza a cricket bat, signed by her, to commemorate the occasion. The ombudsman looked bemused and it was telling that he never mentioned Kula-Ameyaw’s presentation again during the week.

It was onwards and upwards from there though as Advocate Norman Arendse, former CSA president and current independent director, and Max Jordaan, CSA’s head of transformation, spoke of the steps taken to ensure equal opportunities for all before cricket was captured and the likes of Kula-Ameyaw took the reins.

Mary-Anne Dove, a doctor of sports and exercise science whose thesis was on the role of socio-ecological factors in talent development in sport, gave insights into how targets or quotas have to be accompanied by development and other interventions, and Zola Thamae, a former Board member and manager of the Proteas women’s team, gave shocking evidence of how the women’s national team was treated a decade ago.

Professor Richard Calland, an expert on sustainable governance and organisational culture, gave an interesting presentation too.

It is clear that CSA have made a meal of transformation, but it does not matter how many Black player quotas or targets they have, the failure of the Proteas to be truly representative of the country is firstly down to socio-economic issues.

Jordaan, who has been at CSA for 20 years, apart from the disingenuous comment that “nobody is missing out on selection because we are juggling numbers”, made the salient points that when the Proteas won the ICC mace for being top of the Test pile, targets were in place, and that transformation has to start at the many non-former-Model C and private schools and at clubs, but CSA runs into difficulties when they try and improve facilities in these areas due to recalcitrant city councils and the lack of support from the department of education.

Jordaan gave the example of a cricket facility in Welkom being taken over by the local council, who built a casino instead on the land, and buildings in townships “disappearing brick-by-brick”.

Instead of just congratulating themselves for having ticked the box of having a certain number of Black players in the Proteas and domestic teams (which is not a valid measure of transformation success because teams are forced to meet the racial targets), cricket needs to firstly make sure the pipeline at grassroots is working.

I believe CSA have actually done okay in this regard and have worked very hard to keep the pipeline flowing. But there is no doubt Black players still predominantly come from the former Model C and private schools – a much smaller pool.

This is due to structural, systemic problems that only national and local government can fix, especially with the currently constrained financial resources of CSA.

The frustration of Black African cricketers was evident in the presentations of Johannesburg coach David Mashiyi and former player Zonde Mbekeni.

The fact that Mbekeni feels as frustrated and angry about the lack of opportunities for Black Africans as he did in his playing days back in the 1970s is not okay.

But in many ways it boils down to a struggle for scant resources and opportunities.

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.

Cricket South Africa’s Members Council might not yet quite be the beacons of good governance all lovers of the sport hope they become, but Wednesday night’s continuation of their AGM was an efficient 20-minute process in which they accepted Advocate Norman Arendse as an independent director and voted for all four members of the crucial Audit, Governance and Risk Committee to be independent directors as well.

The Members Council’s unanimous dissatisfaction with Arendse, a former president and lead independent director of CSA, was one of the flashpoints during the first sitting of the AGM at the weekend. The Nominations Committee agreed to reconsider but came back with the advocate as the best candidate.

Given that CSA’s new Memorandum of Incorporation makes it quite clear that the Nominations Committee have the final say, the Members Council wisely put up no resistance on Wednesday night.

The 63-year-old Arendse has been a controversial figure, attracting criticism for his continued interference in the selection of the national team and a brusque manner that has been described as bullying, and is not held in any particular fondness by the players.

With memories still fresh of how CSA’s previous Audit and Risk Committee failed so dismally to deal with the malfeasance and impropriety laid bare in the Fundudzi Report, it was pleasing to see the Members Council ensure this crucial body will be totally independent.

Seasoned governance and procurement expert Dr Lawson Naidoo will chair the committee, with Steven Budlender SC, a silk who has made his name in public interest litigation, Simo Lushaba, a leading figure from the Institute of Directors and governance expert who has sat on and chaired numerous boards,  and Mark Rayner, the former CEO of MultiChoice, the other members.

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.