Wed | Aug 23, 2017

WICB: CARICOM proposal 'unnecessary and intrusive'

Published:Friday | January 1, 2016 | 1:00 AM

BRIDGETOWN, Barbados, CMC – The West Indies Cricket Board has branded the CARICOM Governance Review Panel’s main recommendation for it to be dissolved as an “unnecessary and intrusive demand”, and has flat out rejected the controversial proposal.

In a strongly-worded reply to the CARICOM Governance Review Panel’s report in which it also defended its stewardship, the board dismissed the recommendation as “impractical” and said the panel would have been better served focusing on “the need for growing private-public partnerships at the local and regional levels in the interest of West Indies cricket development going forward.”

The panel was commissioned by CARICOM’S Prime Ministerial Committee on Cricket and chaired by UWI Cave Hill Campus principal, Professor Eudine Barriteau.

It also comprised Sir Dennis Byron, president of the Caribbean Court of Justice; West Indies cricket legend Deryck Murray; Warren Smith, president of the Caribbean Development Bank; and Dwain Gill, president of the Grenada Cricket Association.

The major recommendation of the report called for the “immediate dissolution” of the WICB and the appointment of an interim board “whose structure and composition will be radically different from the now proven, obsolete governance framework”

However, the WICB criticised the panel’s investigations as “limited in scope” and said this had “triggered findings and recommendations ... which are not supported by the facts.”

“The presidents of the Territorial Boards expressed concern that neither they, nor members of their respective Boards were interviewed or consulted by the Panel,” the WICB report said.

“Additionally, none of the independent directors were interviewed by the Panel. This failure to consult with a representative variety of local cricket administrators and operators meant, or had the consequence of denying the Panel a full opportunity of ascertaining the key facts.

“This has caused or triggered findings and recommendations by the panel which are not supported by the facts.”

The Board also contended that its dissolution was also not legally viable and such an action also carried with it major financial ramifications.

“The dissolution of the Board is simply not a viable legal or practical option and carries a major financial risk which the panel either ignored or was unaware of,” the WICB stressed.