USA January 9, 2007

Smoke and mirrors inside the USA?

There is now hardly anyone in USA cricket circles who believes that there ever was a Centrex deal negotiated by, and for, the USACA Cricket Association.

There is now hardly anyone in USA cricket circles who believes that there ever was a Centrex deal negotiated by, and for, the USACA Cricket Association.

Reported on Cricinfo by a gentleman who proclaimed himself the USACA representative for media relations (an appointment, incidentally, which was never presented for approval of the USACA board of directors), the magic deal appears to be a case of smoke and mirrors, with no basis in fact or reality. There is no other explanation that can fit the facts at hand.

An unguarded statement by the media representative provides a clue to what is going on. According to his explanation, USACA wanted to make sure the draft constitution was being sent out by hard copy, so its contents would not be "tampered with". Surely some one in the USACA has heard of "read only" reports, which can be sent out with a single mouse click? In any case, if the original of the draft was still in the USACA's files, would it be so difficult to compare it with any tampered drafts that were sent back--and view the tamperings as contributions to the discussion, rather than as attempts to sabotage the USACA? Or is the process of discussion inherently subversive in USACA's eyes, so any discussion is to be perceived as a threat?

Meanwhile, the USA Council of Cricket League Presidents, or CLP, is not waiting for USACA to keep prevaricating. It has moved swiftly to take centre stage in US cricket politics, and is picking up momentum as time passes.

The first thing CLP has done is to find out which US cricket leagues can be counted on for support. Firm participation is expected from leagues west of the Mississippi, including Chicago. As of 2007, there are 15 leagues in Western USA who could participate if they so wished. Perhaps four or five from Eastern USA might join. Together, these leagues cover 75% of cricket clubs in the USA, which is a healthy place to start.

The CLP also forwarded a formal list of 12 amendments to the USACA draft constitution, along with a detailed critique of the draft explaining the need for these amendments - needless to say, there has been no response of any kind from the USACA. The CLP is also taking steps in the federal courts to block USACA's plan to register itself in New York, and seeking an injunction to block any implementation of the draft USACA constitution until it is fully approved and ratified by its membership.

The CLP is warning all cricket clubs that it may take some time to exorcise all the demons left over from the past three years of mismanagement by the USACA. But the process, says CLP, is at last fully under way.

Martin Williamson is executive editor of ESPNcricinfo and managing editor of ESPN Digital Media in Europe, the Middle East and Africa

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Bruce B on January 29, 2007, 18:35 GMT

    I'm all in favor of the CLP. They are at the grass-roots of the game in America, and in a position to build cricket from the ground up (as opposed to the "top-down" approach employed by the USACA).

    The USACA has been an ongoing disaster, and cricket in this country is regarded as a joke worldwide in no small part because of them. As to whether the CLP would do a better job of growing cricket in the USA than the USACA, the better question might be "Can they do any worse?"

  • Texan on January 19, 2007, 18:25 GMT

    Deb: We all will like to see the 12 Amendments to the USACA Constitution. Can you post them or do you have link which can be posted. Have you seen those amendments and who is in charge at CLP? Is there a Committee to review it? If so how that Committee was formed? I will request you to post all the information available on this matter. We are glad that there is some movement in this direction. So please do keep us posted with more details. Thanks.

  • danitylee on January 11, 2007, 23:01 GMT

    Deb - your article seems reaching at best. The CLP cannot block USACA from registering in NY as corporation when its already registered in NY as such for a while now. I thought you were a journalist and would do some research before writing nonsense. The CLP et.al are as pennyless as the fools in USACA and I would not listen to anything for either party. I think the CLP et.al still did not pay that naive lawyer who took them as clients - poor sap.

  • JR on January 10, 2007, 22:05 GMT

    Though I can not speak for or on behalf of the North Texas Cricket Association (NTCA), I most certainly believe the NTCA will support the efforts of the CLP. In the interest of full disclosure it would be refreshing to see the Amendments to the "Proposed" Constitution published. I do not know if the CLP is still prevented from using their website as a conduit for their activities, a update there would be well received in my opinion. As far as registering USACA in NY, I think that would be a move to force all litigation to occur under NY State Statute Law jurisdiction as it applies to 501 (c) 3 organizations. The work around to that action would require the ICC to remove USACA as the recognized organizational body in the US and name another organization incorporated elsewhere in the US. One final point, cricket in the US has been mismanaged by USACA for a period much greater than three years.

  • Bruce B on January 29, 2007, 18:35 GMT

    I'm all in favor of the CLP. They are at the grass-roots of the game in America, and in a position to build cricket from the ground up (as opposed to the "top-down" approach employed by the USACA).

    The USACA has been an ongoing disaster, and cricket in this country is regarded as a joke worldwide in no small part because of them. As to whether the CLP would do a better job of growing cricket in the USA than the USACA, the better question might be "Can they do any worse?"

  • Texan on January 19, 2007, 18:25 GMT

    Deb: We all will like to see the 12 Amendments to the USACA Constitution. Can you post them or do you have link which can be posted. Have you seen those amendments and who is in charge at CLP? Is there a Committee to review it? If so how that Committee was formed? I will request you to post all the information available on this matter. We are glad that there is some movement in this direction. So please do keep us posted with more details. Thanks.

  • danitylee on January 11, 2007, 23:01 GMT

    Deb - your article seems reaching at best. The CLP cannot block USACA from registering in NY as corporation when its already registered in NY as such for a while now. I thought you were a journalist and would do some research before writing nonsense. The CLP et.al are as pennyless as the fools in USACA and I would not listen to anything for either party. I think the CLP et.al still did not pay that naive lawyer who took them as clients - poor sap.

  • JR on January 10, 2007, 22:05 GMT

    Though I can not speak for or on behalf of the North Texas Cricket Association (NTCA), I most certainly believe the NTCA will support the efforts of the CLP. In the interest of full disclosure it would be refreshing to see the Amendments to the "Proposed" Constitution published. I do not know if the CLP is still prevented from using their website as a conduit for their activities, a update there would be well received in my opinion. As far as registering USACA in NY, I think that would be a move to force all litigation to occur under NY State Statute Law jurisdiction as it applies to 501 (c) 3 organizations. The work around to that action would require the ICC to remove USACA as the recognized organizational body in the US and name another organization incorporated elsewhere in the US. One final point, cricket in the US has been mismanaged by USACA for a period much greater than three years.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • JR on January 10, 2007, 22:05 GMT

    Though I can not speak for or on behalf of the North Texas Cricket Association (NTCA), I most certainly believe the NTCA will support the efforts of the CLP. In the interest of full disclosure it would be refreshing to see the Amendments to the "Proposed" Constitution published. I do not know if the CLP is still prevented from using their website as a conduit for their activities, a update there would be well received in my opinion. As far as registering USACA in NY, I think that would be a move to force all litigation to occur under NY State Statute Law jurisdiction as it applies to 501 (c) 3 organizations. The work around to that action would require the ICC to remove USACA as the recognized organizational body in the US and name another organization incorporated elsewhere in the US. One final point, cricket in the US has been mismanaged by USACA for a period much greater than three years.

  • danitylee on January 11, 2007, 23:01 GMT

    Deb - your article seems reaching at best. The CLP cannot block USACA from registering in NY as corporation when its already registered in NY as such for a while now. I thought you were a journalist and would do some research before writing nonsense. The CLP et.al are as pennyless as the fools in USACA and I would not listen to anything for either party. I think the CLP et.al still did not pay that naive lawyer who took them as clients - poor sap.

  • Texan on January 19, 2007, 18:25 GMT

    Deb: We all will like to see the 12 Amendments to the USACA Constitution. Can you post them or do you have link which can be posted. Have you seen those amendments and who is in charge at CLP? Is there a Committee to review it? If so how that Committee was formed? I will request you to post all the information available on this matter. We are glad that there is some movement in this direction. So please do keep us posted with more details. Thanks.

  • Bruce B on January 29, 2007, 18:35 GMT

    I'm all in favor of the CLP. They are at the grass-roots of the game in America, and in a position to build cricket from the ground up (as opposed to the "top-down" approach employed by the USACA).

    The USACA has been an ongoing disaster, and cricket in this country is regarded as a joke worldwide in no small part because of them. As to whether the CLP would do a better job of growing cricket in the USA than the USACA, the better question might be "Can they do any worse?"