IT MUST HAVE INDEED been bittersweet for the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB), that the recent and unprecedented successes of its Under-19, women and senior male cricket teams resulted not in widespread acclaim, applause and praise, but in the opposite – condemnation and rejection.
Whilst it has been convenient to blame this on the post-match comments by captain Darren Sammy, it is clear that WICB has long been facing a legitimation crisis, deepened by the style and personality of its current president Dave Cameron.
One symptom of this legitimation crisis is the fact that players, coaches, cricket commentators and others feel little need for censorship when commenting on the WICB. Sadly, the response by the WICB is to “demand respect”, and instead of pursuing necessary remedial responses (including resignations), chooses instead to sanction offending parties.
However, despite the refusal by the WICB to bow to calls for change, the forces of reform will have to admit to a political stalemate. This stalemate arises largely from the fact that the forces demanding reform are themselves facing their own legitimation challenges.
If the WICB president is enjoying power for its own sake and will not budge, then he is merely reflecting the practice of Caribbean politicians. Just as Caribbean governments confine their practices of democracy to the barest bones dictated by the constitution, then so is Cameron defending his leadership on the existing ICC and regional rules and regulations. If Cameron’s leadership appears smug, arrogant and indeed infantile, then show me the Caribbean parliament in which his behaviour is not replicated.
Similarly, the West Indies players will have to prove that their anti-WICB struggles are not motivated solely by self-interest. They will have to deny the claim that they have been treating West Indies cricket as a last option, remembered only when more lucrative private offers are absent.
Finally, the public has been too susceptible to the argument that the “players should be free to make their money”, are motivated only by victories, and have sent mixed messages on the question of reform. The public behaves like typical West Indian grandmothers who accompany their grandsons to the courthouse and declare them innocent of all transgressions.
There is little doubt that the current WICB leadership has done enough to warrant replacement, that CARICOM is correct in demanding reform, and that the players cannot have their cake and it eat simultaneously. What then can break the stalemate?
A lesson from history. When in the 1960s CLR James determined that it was time for a black captain, he mobilised the West Indian public behind the selection of Frank Worrell.
Only the mobilised West Indian people can effect reform. The struggle, however, must not only be directed at the WICB. The entire fabric of West Indian political life needs to be overhauled. Without this, the stalemate will continue.
