CCA President rants about fund raising dinner
An apparently innocent message indirectly precipitated a rather ugly response to a letter posted on the caribbeancricket.com web site.
are aware that the national team qualified to participate in the World
Cup of Cricket in South Africa in February and March 2003. The Toronto
Cricket Club announced that they planned to send the team off,
This initiative by the Chairman of cricket at the TCC was greeted by a rather poorly written polemic, titled FOREWARNED IS FOREARMED.
For your information
and amusement the following is an unedited copy of an introduction, as
published by caribbeancricket.com, followed by a complete unedited copy
of a letter sent to the web site.
Letters To The
This week's e-mail
feedback was the strangest yet. Usually, our inbox is filled with definitive
responses to our interpretation of
This week's mail
had a different vibe. First, we got a strangely-worded mail in response
to Dr Mike McLean's article on Viv
This letter was
sent in response to Dr Mike McLean's article on fund-raising problems
associated with the Canada Cricket
FOREWARNED IS FOREARMED.
not easy. It is rigidly controlled and even the richest cricket association
in the world recently lost their major
including the WICB, find themselves strapped for cash, even with televised
games, professional teams and gate
The door is wide
open for fundraisers for cricket -- always has been. Not many people have
come forward however in the
Let us see how
much support and moneys the Canadian World Cup squad will receive. Action
not talk please gentlemen.
We have even
had so called "cricket lovers" people vote against providing
Canadian cricket with a token amount from the
the Canadian Cricket Association ( and to the WICB and its members) are
most welcome and Federal tax
The policy has
been in place for 20 years or so. Not many of the illustrious crowd have
bothered to support the players and
the ICC Trophy 2001 resulted in negligible returns. Fundraisers for the
Cricket World Cup 2003 have been
$500,000 to put in the turf wickets to bid for the ICC Trophy 2001, the
best one ever by ICC reports. Without
No workers for
the ICCT or for lots of other Tournaments can be found but we have lots
of Messiahs suddenly paying
Beware of these "saviours." Beware of "bitter fruit."
Forewarned is forearmed.
Canada has also
been to the U-19 World Cup, has for the first time won two games in the
2002 Red Stripe competition and
Beware of these
" the sky is falling " promoters. Look at the other hand - the
one behind the back. Beware of "false prophets"
We at canadacricket.com are bemused that the President of the Canadian Cricket Association would write that "The door is wide open for fundraisers for cricket- always has been. Not many people have come forward however in the meantime. People of means and people with many business friends and contacts should lead the way, not just talk! Let us challenge them all to donate to Canadian cricket. Donations will be publicly acknowledged (unless otherwise requested) and federal Tax receipts will be provided.".
Whilst we would agree that there are many "people of means", but, and this is a big BUT, it simply is not relevant to the CCA position as enunciated by its President. The reason for this is that the CCA is an invisible entity to the cricket playing public right across the country and, therefore by extension, also invisible to their "many business friends and contacts". In a country with one the highest living standards in the world, and advertisers running out of space, this suggestion is hilarious. If the good doctor is not aware, the entire North American high tech market is controlled and staffed by "South Asians". In one office, that we are aware of, the population has about 85% directly from India/Pakistan. These folks have been approached and we are advised that they are planning an inter company tournament. These cricketers do not need the CCA. The CCA needs these cricketers. However, with no communications capacity or facility within the CCA, 'never the twain shall meet'. Kipling did not say that in the context of cricket, but as a cricket aficionado he probably would have in the context of the CCA.
There are many flaws and inconsistencies in the CCA President's 'rant', beyond the disjointed and badly constructed.
The following is presented as an example, "Fundraising is not easy. It is rigidly controlled and even the richest cricket Association in the World recently lost their major sponsor Sahara and probably $30 million USD.".
Is the author aware of the corporate and legal wrangling that took place for Sahara to pull out? The BCCI does not appear to be suffering from lack of sponsorship, for Pepsi is reported to have taken the contract over from Sahara. So we are confused by this apparent lack of knowledge of current affairs related to cricket, or should we suggest that it is a deliberate attempt at mis-information? What the author does not try do is to make a connection, about the relationship of Sahara sponsorship in India, and the relevancy to the lack of domestic Canadian fundraising. We suggest, not too respectfully, that the CCA President is not au courrant with the reality of what is going on. This is exemplified by comparing the CCA President's missive dated October 3, 2002, with the article published in ICC Cricket News 13/09/02, which in part reads as follows:-
contrary to the agreement reached by all countries in Dubai,
this, the ICC is seeking to be as accommodating as possible and has
is subject to the removal from the proposed design for the
Why does the CCA President write without checking the facts, which have been in the public domain for three weeks? Hmmmmm ...... no comment.
At another juncture in the rant it is stated that, "Most countries including the WICB find themselves strapped for cash, even with televised games, professional teams and gate receipts.". This is an outrageous generalization, unsupported by any evidence. Has the author in fact examined the balance sheets of "most countries" who play cricket? What we know, for sure, is that the Canadian cricket community is not going to be made privy to the financial records of their national association. Why is that? Should we ask Revenue Canada to do it for us? Is the failure to provide the financial records of the CCA, in compliance with the Bylaws of the Association, something we should worry about? Cricketer lawyers please note and send us your views. We will be happy to report on your findings. We hope for the best, but we fear the worst.
The link, made
by the CCA President, about "the development of Canadian and West
Indies cricket " is both
We are delighted that the CCA President has written, "Let us see how much support and moneys the Canadian World Cup squad will receive." You can bet Mr. President that we are going to closely monitor that particular item, for we note with particular satisfaction the words you wrote "Let us see how much ...... the Canadian World Cup squad will receive". Yes indeed, every last cent of the funds raised will be made public and the players will know .... and they will soon enough let all of their supporters know.
Finally we note that the author stated "Donations to the Canadian Cricket Association are most welcome and Federal tax receipts are provided to all donors. In addition, all fundraisers are eligible for a portion of any funds raised." Given that our information is that the CCA has not submitted mandatory returns to the Government of Canada for a couple of years, we are obliged to ask, are you sure that the "Federal tax receipts" will be legitimate? Are they going to be worth the paper they are written on? Similarly we are concerned about the assertion that "fundraisers are eligible for a portion of any funds raised...". Is that legal, for it sounds suspiciously like skimming off the top. Does that mean that the Toronto Cricket Club will be handed "a portion of any funds raised"? It is unlikely that the TCC would accept the "portion", for that would dilute the amount available for the players. However it bodes the question, will the CCA have the integrity to make the offer?.
it appears that Dr Edward's rebuttal is the reaction of a man caught in
a situation he simply does not have the ability to deal with. Nor has
he the commonsense, or street smarts, to pull the yokes together and make
something of the past and coming years. He is not speaking to the public
that cares about cricket. He appears to be treating them like they are
uneducated and ignorant. Information via the internet is easily available
to anyone, which suggest that his petty arguments will be dismissed quickly.
Think of it this way, this piece will be posted on a web site and cross
posted on other cricket web sites. Those who read that particular site
have enough brain power to, for example, to examine the development plans
of the Australian Cricket Board on the official ACB site. We suggest that
a large percentage of the readership have some kind of post secondary
education, be it in North America or elsewhere, and would inevitably take
notice of the glaring weaknesses of 'the rant', and are quite capable
of pointing out some more. We invite your comments and observations.
Please contact us with all your opinions on this article
Note: The views expressed in the Opinion pages, unless otherwise stated, are the views of those who author the pages, and are not necessarily the views of CanadaCricket.com.