“It’s business as usual.” – a CSA spokesperson after SASCOC’s apparent intervention.
TELFORD VICE | Cape Town
CSA’s ragged, tattered suits are not going quietly. Cricket’s crisis-crippled custodians “do not agree” with the country’s Olympic body removing their board and key staff. So they are talking to their lawyers. More importantly, it isn’t clear if the move falls foul of the ICC’s rules on interference, and whether it could lead to the door to the international arena being closed on South Africa’s teams.
The South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) are not recognised as a government organisation. But all South Africa’s sport federations are members, and they have the power to put those federations under administration. SASCOC’s decision, taken on Monday, was passed by unanimous vote. The resolutions from that meeting make clear they acted on government instruction, citing a “directive by the minister of sport and recreation [Nathi Mthethwa] for SASCOC to intervene into the affairs of CSA”.
The ICC constitution says a member is obliged to “manage its affairs autonomously and ensure that there is no government (or other public or quasi-public body) interference in its governance, regulation and/or administration of cricket in its cricket playing country (including in operational matters, in the selection and management of teams, and in the appointment of coaches or support personnel)”.
It is difficult to understand how SASCOC’s decision, taken at government’s bidding, does not add up to interference. Whether the intervention is unacceptable to the ICC, and warrants CSA’s suspension, is another matter.
A letter from SASCOC to CSA — which has been seen by Cricbuzz — demands that “the CSA board and those senior executives who serve ex-officio on the board (the company secretary, the acting CEO, the CFO and the COO) are directed to step aside from the administration of CSA on full pay” pending the outcome of a month-long investigation by a yet to be named task team into what SASCOC termed “many instances of maladministration and malpractice that have occurred since at least December 2019”.
Among the reasons for SASCOC taking action are the resignations of president Chris Nenzani and acting chief executive Jacques Faul — both revealed on August 17 — and the suspension of former chief executive Thabang Moroe, which endured for almost nine months before he was fired on August 28 for serious misconduct. Moroe is challenging his dismissal in court.
“This has manifestly caused great concern and consternation amongst your own members, former and current members of the national team of the Proteas, stakeholders, sponsors, and members of the cricket-loving public,” SASCOC wrote. “There can be no doubt that this has caused cricket to lose the trust and confidence of members of the public, stakeholders, sponsors and the players represented by SACA [the South African Cricketers’ Association]. All this has brought cricket into disrepute.”
SASCOC took a dim view of CSA’s dallying about handing over a forensic report into the organisation’s state of affairs: “SASCOC has attempted to address these issues in two meetings with the CSA board: one was exploratory, and the other failed to take place mainly because of the fact that CSA failed to make the Fundudzi forensic report available to the SASCOC board despite promises and undertakings by CSA to do so. CSA is in receipt of our letter which records that the board’s decision to make the said report available only on a limited basis to the president and board members of SASCOC, is wholly unreasonable and irrational given the apparent nature and scope of the report.”
The ICC could contemplate whether all that constitutes interference, but they are more likely to ask CSA for clarification and to act only when and if they receive a complaint on the matter. Already, the South African Institute of Race Relations have written to the ICC protesting CSA’s promise to Mthethwa last Monday to hire only black or brown consultants unless none are available. Judging by the tone of a release that landed at 1am South Africa time on Friday — four-and-a-half hours after Cricbuzz asked them for comment on SASCOC’s letter — CSA might have a moan to the mother body themselves: “CSA, including its members council [their highest authority], does not agree with the resolution taken by SASCOC and has not had the opportunity to engage with SASCOC on various issues raised in the communication.
“In addition, CSA is taking legal advice regarding the basis on which SASCOC has sought to intervene in the business affairs of CSA. CSA does, however, commit to engaging further with SASCOC to understand its position and to find common ground with it in the best interests of cricket. The members council and the directors of the board of CSA will hold a joint workshop this weekend to discuss critical matters.”
SASCOC themselves are hardly paragons of governance and administration. They have an acting president and an acting chief executive, and are riven with internecine internal disputes. Whether they have followed correct procedure in putting the screws on CSA is unclear. They may have done so too quickly and without allowing the ragged, tattered suits a proper chance to explain themselves.
What happens now? Should, say, the BCCI decide to reach across the Indian Ocean and see if South Africa are up for a series once the borders are open, and put some money into their crumpled coffers, who answers the phone? Theoretically, the board, “the company secretary, the acting chief executive, the chief financial officer and the chief operating officer” have been relieved of their duties.
SASCOC don’t seem to have thought beyond appointing an investigating task team, and Mthethwa heads the toy department in a dysfunctional government. Exactly who will run the game? For the many South Africans who have grown used to lunatics controlling the nation’s asylums, this will be another in the umpteen examples of people who haven’t a clue what they’re doing telling other people who haven’t a clue what they’re doing what to do and how to do it.
But might that mean someone who does seem to know what they’re doing and has been spared SASCOC’s swipe — acting head of pathways Eddie Khoza, for instance, or director of cricket Graeme Smith — will be on the other end of the line if the BCCI call? Don’t get your hopes up. “It’s business as usual,” a CSA spokesperson said on Friday when asked whether any or all of the above staff had reported for duty. Not that CSA’s phone is likely to ring. Unless SASCOC, Mthethwa, or nasty lawyers are itching to talk to them. Yes, it really is that bad.
First published by Cricbuzz.
Bulletproof Truth 