Delinquent CSA threatened with state control

“I have now reached a point where I see no value in any further engagement with CSA.” – push comes to shove for sports minister Nathi Mthethwa.

TELFORD VICE | Cape Town

STATE control of cricket in South Africa looms in the wake of the sports minister telling crisis-ridden CSA that he will intervene. A release from the ministry to that effect on Wednesday comes in the wake unsuccessful attempts by the country’s sports confederation as well as parliament — themselves models of how organisations should not be run — to bring delinquent cricket to heel.

Under the minister’s direction, the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) told CSA’s board and key staff to relinquish their positions, pending a month-long investigation, on September 10. That has not happened, and CSA’s meetings with a parliamentary oversight committee on October 6 and 13 have not yielded evidence of progress.

The release spoke of “efforts … made over several months to try and assist CSA to stabilise its governance matters” and of “a huge outcry regarding the failure of [CSA’s] leadership to effectively manage its affairs”. Both are fair criticisms of an organisation that has stumbled from one catastrophe to the next in governance, ethical and financial terms.

“Having evaluated the discussions as well as the subsequent reporting on this matter, I have now reached a point where I see no value in any further engagement with CSA,” the release quoted sports minister Nathi Mthethwa as saying. He had “given notice of government intervention to the ICC”, and CSA have until close of business on October 27 to “make written representations, should they wish to, on why [Mthethwa] should not exercise his decision to intervene as enjoined by the laws of the country”.

The National Sport and Recreation Act says the minister may “after consultation … intervene in any dispute, alleged mismanagement, or any other related matter in sport or recreation that is likely to bring a sport or recreation into disrepute”. He may not become involved if the matter has been referred to SASCOC, unless SASCOC “fails to resolve such dispute within a reasonable time”. He also may not “interfere in matters relating to the selection of teams, administration of sport, and appointment of, and termination of the service of, the executive members of the sport or recreation body”. But he can cut off government funding and “notify the national federation in writing that it will not be recognised by Sport and Recreation South Africa”. Effectively, Mthethwa has the authority to tell the Proteas they are not South Africa’s team.    

CSA did not immediately respond to requests for comment beyond saying it would issue a statement. But in a letter to Mthethwa dated October 9, which has been seen by Cricbuzz, acting president Beresford Williams wrote that the board “are of the view (and have been advised) that you do not have power, in terms of the National Sport and Recreation Act 110 of 1998, to require members of the CSA board to ‘step down’. Furthermore, we are of the view that such a requirement probably constitutes government interference in CSA’s governance, regulation and/or administration, as contemplated in the memorandum of association of the ICC and, as such, interferes with CSA’s contractual obligations to the ICC and jeopardises CSA’s continued membership of the ICC.”

Asked for its opinion, the ICC said through a spokesperson: “The ICC has received a letter from the ministry of sport, arts and culture in South Africa giving notice of potential intervention into the matters of CSA. At this stage, no complaint has been received from CSA regarding government intervention and members are encouraged to resolve matters directly with their governments. We will continue to monitor the situation.”

The ICC is unlikely to weigh in unless CSA complains formally, and the fact is Mthethwa hasn’t done anything yet. But the ICC constitution makes plain that 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)”.

No doubt that’s why Wednesday’s release makes the point that “Mthethwa strongly believes that there is great merit in creating an environment where sports problems are handled within the sports movement and accordingly wishes to offer them every possible opportunity to demonstrate their stated commitment to cooperate on a way forward for cricket”.

CSA has done the opposite at every turn. Tellingly, it had to be bullied into handing over to parliament — for all its failings still the people’s representative — the complete version of the Fundudzi forensic report, which was used to fire Thabang Moroe as chief executive, implicates others in potential wrongdoing, and lays bare a litany of maladies. 

Little wonder that, later on Wednesday, the South African Cricketers’ Association repeated its perennial call for CSA’s board to go: “The crises that have engulfed the CSA board over the past 18 months have culminated in a situation where there is no longer confidence in their ability to govern the organisation and provide guidance on resolving many of the crises that remain. SACA believes that an interim board of directors should be established to stabilise the organisation.”

This structure “must include a SACA player’s representative as well as a representative from the remaining stakeholders in the game (sponsors and broadcasters)” and appoint “an experienced administrator to assist in the operational work that is required at CSA, ensuring a link between the interim board and operational staff”.

SACA chief executive Andrew Breetzke was quoted as saying: “Cricket is in an existential crisis … [and] … as has been recognised by [the ministry] and SASCOC, the current board has no credibility to resolve the crises, and it is clear that the current impasse between government and CSA will not be resolved until such time as the board stands down.”

Omphile Ramela, SACA’s president, was quoted as saying: “As we have stated previously CSA is not able to self-correct, and the intervention of government is further evidence of this.”

CSA’s hopes that England will visit in the coming months, which could be worth the equivalent of USD4.2-million to the home board, now hang by a thread. And that’s not all that is in danger: the game of cricket as South Africans have come to know it seems on the cusp of radical change. It’s a measure of the size of the mess CSA have made that that may be no bad thing.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Join my email list

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

In allowing CSA an easy escape, parliament failed cricket

“I don’t even know this person who you are talking about. Who’s that person?” – committee chair Beauty Dlulane fails to recognise the name of Naasei Appiah, who is mentioned 10 times in a summary of the Fundudzi report.

TELFORD VICE | Cape Town

CSA will hold its board’s feet to the fire for losing its way before, during and after the tenure of Thabang Moroe, who was not qualified to be appointed chief executive. But the findings of the forensic investigation that was used to sack Moroe and might yet cost others their positions will not be made public.

Also, the conflict of interest inherent in CSA’s upper structures must be undone, the game will be in trouble if international teams do not resume touring soon, and government should interfere in cricket if needs be.

That was the extent of the value of the almost four hours CSA spent discussing the Fundudzi forensic report with a parliamentary committee on Tuesday. For the rest, CSA were in the unusual position of appearing to be the more competent people in the room. Then again, the other people in the virtual room for the online meeting were shockingly out-of-touch with the state of the game — and thus woefully unsuited to their roles.

Although the oversight committee, comprised of MPs from a range of parties, was furnished with the 468-page report on Friday, it was apparent that most members hadn’t bothered to give the document more than a cursory glance.

On being informed that Naasei Appiah had joined the meeting despite having been being fired as CSA’s chief operating officer — a decision he says he will fight — Beauty Dlulane, the committee chair, said: “I don’t even know this person who you are talking about. Who’s that person?” Appiah is mentioned 10 times in the summary of the forensic report released on October 5, and presumably more often in the full version. If Dlulane had been familiar with either document she would have known who he is. 

Consequently, CSA’s representatives were able to deal easily with half-volleys instead of snorters and yorkers, correcting umpteen errors of fact committed by ignorant committee members as they went. The meeting was an exercise in worthlessness mitigated only by the contributions of Marius Schoeman, the CSA independent director who chairs its audit and risk committee.

“There is clarity that what happened happened under the watch of the board, and accountability rests with the board,” Schoeman said. “The board appoints the executive and has an oversight function. The current board has an accountability and a responsibility to address the findings [of the report]. No finding can be left and not be actioned on, and that’s the responsibility of the current board.” And the buck doesn’t stop with board members: “Every [CSA] employee who is implicated in the report will be addressed within the disciplinary code.”

When will the rest of us get a look at those 468 pages? “The report will remain confidential,” Schoeman said. “The feedback to stakeholders will be the actions that have been taken. We will not reveal details within the document. We will get a third-party assurance provider that will confirm that specific matters have been addressed.”

Much of the report deals with the failings of Moroe, who was dismissed in August. Should he have landed the post at all, considering he came to it from a midlevel position with a cellphone service provider? “As far as the question of the appointment of Mr Moroe, that he didn’t meet the minimum requirements, yes — you are correct,” Schoeman told a curious committee member. “It’s a finding that I find astonishing, in that one has minimum requirements. The report also indicates that the advertisement was different from the job description. In my experience those are things that should not happen.”

Much that shouldn’t happen does happen at CSA, not least because its highest authority, the members council where each of cricket’s 14 provinces is represented, also takes seven places on the 12-member board. That could change at the annual meeting, which is scheduled for December 5. “We realise that there’s much work to be done insofar as regaining the trust of our stakeholders, including the public,” Schoeman said. “One of the key factors, and it comes out of the report, is the inherent conflict of interest that exists because members of the members council are also board members. In terms of the members council charter and MOI [memorandum of incorporation] they have to act in the best interests of the affiliate members that has nominated them, but as a director they have to act in the best interests of CSA. I do not want to be in their shoes, because it’s difficult to wear those two hats. The priority is on doing what’s best for CSA, because the role of directors is governed by the Companies Act and overrides charters. Poor oversight, poor governance — it’s evident from the report; no doubt.”

Schoeman was supported by Dheven Dharmalingam, another CSA indepedent director, who said: “We need to make sure that, at the annual meeting, this board ends up with a majority of independent directors.” 

Dharmalingam, CSA’s finance committee chair, made the case for government to allow South Africa to host international teams again in the wake of the coronavirus lockdown: “If we don’t start playing cricket, we don’t earn content revenue [from broadcast rights] and we don’t earn our share of the profit from the ICC, [and] this organisation will be in trouble.”

Teams from countries that have high virus infection rates need government permission to visit South Africa. England, who CSA hope will arrive near the end of the year to play six white-ball matches and put up to USD4.2-million into the coffers, is such a country. Will they be allowed to come?

Not by the tone of committee member Nocks Seabi’s view: “CSA is a public entity. It is running cricket as a sport on behalf of South Africans. If there is a need for government to intervene in the interests of South Africans, we do so.”

Seabi is an MP for the ruling African National Congress, which also counts sports minister Nathi Mthethwa among its members. In a letter, seen by Cricbuzz, to CSA’s acting president, Beresford Williams — who was forced to recuse himself from Tuesday’s meeting because he is implicated in the report — Mthethwa rasps that Williams is “kindly reminded that as a sovereign country in which I am the minister responsible for sport … there is a raft of laws at my disposal that empower me to deal effectively with recalcitrant behaviour within my portfolio”. 

That authority includes the withdrawal of national colours, which would prevent South Africa’s teams from representing the country. As bad as things are, they could get worse. 

First published by Cricbuzz.

Join my email list

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Big day looms for cricket in South Africa. And for CSA.

“These discussions have taken place in light of the current cricketing landscape globally and in South Africa.” – Craig Bowen, New Balance’s South Africa representative, confirms the company is reconsidering its deal with CSA.

TELFORD VICE | Cape Town

TUESDAY looms as a watershed for South African cricket. Not because CSA will be back in parliament to explain itself to the same committee that shouted it down last week. Neither because cricket’s suits are due to meet with the head suit himself, the sports minister.

What means more is that Tuesday marks 220 days since the national men’s team were in action, their longest period of idleness since readmission in 1991. If not enough cricket of the kind that brings in revenue is played in South Africa the game will become a weekend hobby for committed amateurs — a scenario the pandemic has made exponentially more real, especially in an economy that was struggling before an invisible pathogen changed life and death as we know it.

But this truth has gone almost unnoticed by those who should be concerned with the good of the game. Instead they are more intent on making themselves heard to the people they need to impress, who themselves seem determined to make more noise than sense. While the game in the wider world has been confronting its frailties as an industry, South African cricket has been chasing its tail about chronic, deep-seated and relevant issues of governance, transformation and racism.

CSA’s presentation to the parliamentary portfolio committee on sport, which it planned to deliver last Tuesday, is a case in point. Seen by Cricbuzz, it amounts to 52 pages in which the virus features a grand total of once, and even then well down the priority list in a bullet point on page 41: “Player and staff salaries not cut or impacted by Covid-19.” Not that Marius Schoeman, the CSA board member entrusted with presenting the document to the committee, got anywhere close to page 41. He had barely begun when he was interrupted by MPs who wanted to know why CSA hadn’t released the full report of the Fundudzi forensic investigation into cricket’s litany of catastrophe. Allowed to resume after almost half-an-hour of self-serving bombast, Schoeman was soon derailed again. 

If the committee had been more inclined to listen to voices other than its own, it might have learnt that CSA plans — the presentation paper says — to make “part of the membership requirements that the executive management teams of unions and the boards become predominantly black with a heavy focus on black female members in these critical positions. The intention is to identify at least 10 black female candidates. The onus will be placed on [provincial] affiliates to address the current status of non-transformed positions especially in CEO and executive positions. Failure by the unions to do this will result in financial penalties.” The process will start in December.

Considering only 58 of the 145 country’s current provincial board members are black, and that just 20 of the total are women, the importance of this goal is obvious. But where is cricket going to find, in a matter of weeks, as many as 10 black women who have the required skills and experience in a system that has historically been unwelcoming to women, and far more so to black women? The proposal seems less about remedying the situation than telling politicians what they want to hear.

There is similar concern in the presentation about the fact that “the number of selections for whites’ dwarfs the numbers for any of the black demographic”. Whites comprised 54% of South Africa’s players last season — more than double the 22% of blacks selected, and the 24% of brown players. Whether that will mean a revision of the race-based targets — at least six black or brown players in every South Africa XI, two of them black — or a greater say by the board in selection matters is unclear.

If last Tuesday’s meeting achieved anything it was CSA’s agreement that the complete Fundudzi report would be delivered to parliament by last Friday. That happened, but we should be braced for another bunfight on Tuesday if reports that names have been redacted are accurate.

Already the main purpose of the investigation appears to have been to enable CSA to rid itself of Thabang Moroe, who was sacked as chief executive in August on charges of “serious misconduct”. Indeed, the presentation that has yet to see the light of the committee room admits that, on July 2, some four months after the probe started, “The terms of reference of the forensic investigation were amended to permit the forensic investigator to provide the board with certain information/report chapters related to the conduct of certain members of the CSA management team, but excluding any information related to the investigation of the conduct of the board and the members council.” Why? “This was done to expedite the matter of the suspended CEO who had been under precautionary suspension for eight months.” So, not to spare others scrutiny that might show they acted in concert with Moroe, or aided and abetted him, or failed in their duty to subject his performance to the required oversight? “The terms of reference were not amended to absolve the board from being investigated.” Really? It’s difficult to accept the say-so of an organisation that has a track record of doing the wrong thing.

As bad as all of the above is, none of it is as urgent an existential threat as the coronavirus. But not, it seems, in the estimation of CSA, which would be better served taking its cue on how seriously to regard this threat to its core business from its dwindling number of commercial partners.

“There is no doubt that the coronavirus has impacted the game around the world,” Craig Bowen, the South African representative for New Balance, the national teams’ kit supplier, told Cricbuzz. “Every person and entity vested in the game has been affected and we are all working to mitigate this impact in the most constructive way possible.”

Asked about information from sources who say the company is considering ending its relationship with CSA, Bowen said: “I can confirm that New Balance is currently in discussions with CSA regarding the future of our partnership. These discussions have taken place in light of the current cricketing landscape globally and in South Africa in order to review the strategic imperatives of this partnership with the aim of determining the most beneficial route forward for both our brand, CSA and the cricketing public at large.”

Whether South Africa’s players are in danger of losing the shirts off their backs because of Covid-19 or that other virus in their midst, CSA itself — or both — is moot. But it’s not difficult to grasp why a kit supplier doesn’t see the point of handing out playing gear to teams that haven’t been able to get its logo onto screens for 220 straight days. And counting.

CSA will want to use its meeting with Nathi Mthethwa, the sports minister, to end that drought. Although lockdown regulations have been eased enough to allow teams to travel to South Africa, those from countries that have high rates of infection will not be allowed in. That includes England, who CSA are hoping to lure for a white-ball visit in the coming months that could earn more than USD4-million. The venture is not necessarily doomed because, as per government guidance, “any person from a country listed as having a high Covid-19 infection and transmission rate who wishes to undertake business travel into South Africa may, in writing, apply to the minister of home affairs and demonstrate reasons” why an exception should be made.

What will CSA promise Mthethwa to earn his blessing for England’s presence in the country? Better question: what won’t it be prepared to promise? South Africans who yearn to see their team play again had better be careful what they wish for. They may just get it.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Join my email list

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Even pompous, parasitic, pathetic parliament is pissed off with CSA

South Africans who sat through this shambles of a parliamentary meeting were reminded, not for the first time, why they want their taxes back. And a new set of cricket suits while we’re at it.

TELFORD VICE | Cape Town

WHEN the sports portfolio committee of South Africa’s deeply dysfunctional parliament came face to face, virtually, with CSA’s heavyweights on Tuesday, they found themselves looking in the mirror. They didn’t like what they saw, and they said so.

For much of more than two hours, CSA was repeatedly branded as arrogant, disrespectful and undermining for failing to provide the committee with the full report on a forensic investigation into the ills afflicting a game that was in danger of destroying itself even before the pandemic arrived to hurry that process along.

By the end of the exercise, CSA had committed to complying with the committee’s demand to be furnished with the full report by Friday. “It’s a tipping point and a step in the right direction,” Marius Schoeman, the independent member of CSA’s board who chairs the finance committee and easily the most believable of all who attended Tuesday’s meeting, said of the parliamentary committee’s resolution. “The protocol to follow is that the members council will just be consulted and confirm that the board may release this report. It will be released in hard copy by Fundudzi [the firm that conducted the investigation] by Friday, close of business, 16 hours 30. If this is not done by 16:30 on Friday then I will resign.”

CSA received the document on July 31, but has resisted releasing it — including to the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC), who asked for it — citing legal and governance implications. Lawyers acting for CSA prepared a summary, which was made public on Monday. Angered by that, and by CSA’s admission that minister of sport Nathi Mthethwa had been given a copy of the report, the committee demanded the document.

That an institution as low in the public’s esteem as parliament, for many the epicentre of corruption in the country, should feel emboldened to lecture others on the rights and wrongs of anything will be seen as an indication of just how far cricket has fallen. Or taken as an instance of politicians using the opportunity to take the heat off themselves by attacking easy targets. Either way, South Africans who sat through this shambles were reminded, not for the first time, why they want their taxes back. And a new set of cricket suits while we’re at it.

The unfunny comedy started with committee chair Beauty Dlulane issuing a bumptious soliloquy about CSA’s failure to deliver on a promise made to the same committee in June that it would make the report available once it was complete. “I respected cricket’s leadership when they said they were waiting and processing,” Dlulane began. “But the respect I have given you I didn’t see in return.

“You think that this report does not belong to the committee. Why should we wait, five months down the line? And instead of this committee being given the full report [a summary] goes to the public. I’m very disappointed with your leadership for disrespecting even the chairperson of this committee, who gave you chances when the members [of the committee] said I shouldn’t.

“You didn’t have the courtesy of thinking, five months down the line, that there is a committee of parliament that you were supposed to prioritise. I don’t take kindly to what you have done to me. I’m so disappointed in your leadership that, five months down the line, you have done this to us.”

That set the tone for too many versions of Dlulane’s view, interspersed with infantile squabbling and occasional nuggets of relevance. Like the director general of sport, Vusumusi Mkhize, saying, “I can confirm that the report was delivered directly to the minister personally to minimise risk of the information leaking.” And another independent member of CSA’s board, Dheven Dharmalingam, reminding all present that the findings of an investigation, even if they had led to Thabang Moroe being fired as CSA chief executive, were minor compared to what loomed in the real world: “We need to get our players back to playing. If we don’t, when do we earn our next rand? What the business of CSA is all about is selling content. If our players are not playing we’re not going to survive as an organisation anyway. And hundreds of people in South Africa who are reliant for their livelihood on CSA will be impacted.”

South Africa’s fixture lists, domestic and international, are blank — not only as a result of CSA’s ineptitude but also because the borders remain closed to travelling teams. There are serious doubts about CSA’s ability to run the game, but there is no doubt that Covid-19, and the regulations to combat the spread of the virus, could kill it.

That didn’t stop Eugenia Kula-Ameyaw, another of CSA’s independent directors, from wandering down a tangent and trying to argue that SASCOC, rather than parliament, should be furnished with the report: bizarre considering CSA was fighting desperately against doing exactly that just days ago. Kula-Ameyaw’s proposal was summarily shot down, prompting Dlulane to pronounce: “The more time we give you to talk as individuals, I’m suspecting you don’t understand what you want to do.”

At least she got that right.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Join my email list

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.