THE WEST Indies Cricket Board (WICB) is currently immersed in arrangements for its coming Annual General Meeting on March 27, at a period when the governing body of this region’s most popular game continues to reveal serious leadership weaknesses, and alarming consistency for ignoring well-intentioned ‘time-for-change’ recommendations.

Perhaps some of the best known major recommendations for structural changes, creative policies and programmes in the interest of national and regional cricket can be found in the October 2007 ‘Report on Governance of West Indies Cricket’ submitted by a high-level three-member committee.
Interestingly, this committee was established by the WICB, largely on an initiative by CARICOM, at a time of perceived widening crises, including poor management and recurring conflicts between the Board and the West Indies Players Association (WIPA).
Now, more than five years later, a convergence of  seeming ‘ole boys’ interest blended with a shared passion for retaining a management status quo, the cricket-loving people of our region remain exposed to customary contempt from the WICB’s decision-makers on the implementation process of that seminal ‘Governance Committee Report’.
The big ‘news’ at present is focused on who will be elected or re-elected for the leadership structure of the WICB.
Will, for instance, the incumbent four-time president, Julian Hunte of St. Lucia again succeed in his bid for re-election? Or will the prize go to current vice-president, Jamaica’s Wycliffe Cameron, who has been eyeing his chances for the Number One spot and now seems likely to win?
According to a report in Friday’s edition of the Barbados Nation, Hunte may very well be defeated by a surprising decision by the Windward Islands Board  to back its president, Emmanuel Nathan of Dominica for the WICB’s vice-presidency, and support Jamaica’s Cameron to succeed Hunte as president.
Whatever the new post-elections management structure of the WICB, informed cricket commentators, as well as others knowledgeable about cricket in the West Indies, are quite likely to remain cynical and doubtful about required fundamental management changes, as advocated in the Governance Committee Report on West Indies Cricket.
That committee comprised three well-known names across this region: Former long-serving Jamaica Prime Minister, P.J. Patterson (Chairman); Sir Alister McInyre; and Dr Ian McDonald,  all recognised as knowledgeable and passionate enthusiasts of West Indies cricket.
It would have been by design that this trio of reputable West Indians summoned the support of, among other dedicated and informed citizens, Professor Hilary Beckles, Principal of the UWI (Cave Hill Campus), to write the foreword to their report. Beckles placed his focus on ‘The Unique Role of Cricket in West Indian Society’.

Scant interest
Questions rightly continue to be raised on the scant interest shown by the WICB in the phased implementation of the Governance Committee Report and, relatedly, the evident failure of CARICOM, via its Prime Ministerial Sub-Committee on Cricket to even succeed in securing a necessary structured working relationship with the Board’s decision-makers.
Nevertheless, I wish to refer to what is viewed as a shocking contempt shown by the WICB towards the regional and international cricket icon, Clive Lloyd.
At a time when some sports, social and political commentators, as well as government and private sector leaders have gone loudly silent, the legendary fast-bowling Andy Roberts chose to go public with his deep disappointment over the shocking failure by Lloyd to secure a required second nomination from ANY of the territorial boards, other than his hometown’s Guyana Cricket Board.
Having been first nominated by the GCB — the least that could be expected from that body for a celebrated Guyanese national hero, much respected across the cricketing world –Lloyd had sought a required second nomination from the cricket boards of Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago.

Stoic Lloyd
Whatever the real reason or reasons, they opted to reject his request. Like the gentleman he is known to be, Lloyd chose to remain stoic in the face of seeming orchestrated humiliation. He simply reacted by saying he sought the opportunity to have a second nomination, did not secure it, and he prefers no further involvement.
Let it be noted here that it was the second rejection by the WICB in general to be suffered by Lloyd, the first being the self-serving, expedient one by his first bid while then living in England.
Although it was public knowledge that Lloyd had sustained a physical presence in his native land; kept commuting between Britain and the Caribbean; never lost active interest in West Indies cricket; and that he bears impeccable credentials for service provided national, regional and international cricket, his “foreign” home-base was used as the excuse to deny his running for the WICB presidency.
This time around, in going public with his own disappointment, Andy Roberts, who had served on various WICB committees, has told the media: “Lloyd has a proven track record leading from the front and is a respected figure…He would have been my choice for President and it  is a pity the territorial boards did not accept his offer (for a second nomination).
Writing earlier on the coming WICB elections, the noted cricket broadcaster and columnist, Tony Cozier, thought it necessary to alert readers that “nothing is likely to change…
“The shambolic state of West Indies cricket administration,” declared Cozier, “long established, has (now) been further substantiated by the jostling for the West Indies Cricket Board’s presidency…”
He noted that Julian Hunte, “after hinting that he would finally step down as president, has been reportedly influenced to seek a fourth successive term…”
For the former long-serving President of the West Indies Players Association (WIPA), Dinanath Ramnarine, who had recurring battles with the WICB’s management of the game:
“It’s quite sad that such an outstanding Caribbean man, like Clive Lloyd, internationally famous as a player and leader in West Indies cricket could have been denied the opportunity to gain the required (second) nomination needed to contest the post of chairman.”
Perhaps the Heads of Government must now tell the region’s public if and when they intend to revive interest in that seminal report of the Patterson-chaired ‘Governance Committee on West Indies Cricket’.