Interviews InterviewsRSS FeedFeeds

Ozias Bvute

'I don't wield power over the fortunes of men'

Zimbabwe Cricket's CEO talks about why, contrary to popular belief, he isn't the man who pulls the strings in the country's cricket administration

Interview by Martin Williamson

February 9, 2009

Comments: 10 | Text size: A | A

Ozias Bvute has been a controversial figure over the years of his association with the Zimbabwe board. He was appointed in 2001 to the then Zimbabwe Cricket Union as the head of its Integration Implementation Committee. He took on the role of the board's head of marketing, and rose to the rank of managing director in 2004. Long thought of as the man who wields the real power within the board - a charge he strenuously denies here - Bvute, in one of the very few interviews he has given, speaks about being refused entry into Australia to attend an ICC meeting, reacts to allegations about Zimbabwe Cricket being politicised, and looks back at the board's conflicts with players over the decade.


"Zimbabwe Cricket, like any other organisation, is made up of people who have various political views. I do not enquire of these views as it is not my business" © Wisden
Enlarge
 

Are you, as has been implied, the real power behind the throne inside Zimbabwe Cricket?
It baffles me how I can be regarded as such. As CEO, I am an employee of the board. As the head of the ZC executive, I am responsible to the board for the day-to-day management of the organisation.

I formulate no policy myself and only sit on the board in an ex officio capacity, in keeping with the dictates of corporate governance. To ascribe to me powers that I cannot have in a professional organisation such as ZC is not only erroneous but an insult to the men and women who sit on the board and their constituencies.

It should be remembered that the process of enacting the current ZC constitution involved a wide spectrum of consultations and the draft passed through the then ICC CEO and president, who gave their input to bring the document into line with international best practice.

How would you respond to accusations that the board is, in fact, not democratic and has been purged of all opposition?
It baffles the mind that the word "purge" is used when no one was excluded from putting their names into the hat during the electoral process by approaching their clubs for nomination into provincial structures and thereafter the national board.

It's a fact that given the population demographics of the country, the majority of players and club officials are black, and so nominations coming from these clubs are predominantly black.

It's very flattering and intoxicating to be told that you wield power over the fortunes of men. Occasionally I wish that was so, but sadly it is not.

It has often been said that the board is a political body, taking orders from and implementing the policies of the government, and that your arrival accelerated that process.
Allow me to point out that my entry into cricket did not politicise the ZC board. For me to politicise the board would have meant bringing in political figures to run cricket in furtherance of their political ends.

You can look at any board that I have been a part of and on none of them has there been a person holding political office. To the contrary, the boards have comprised lawyers, educators, farmers and businessmen.

For you to best understand where cricket in Zimbabwe currently stands, I would like to give you some historical background. Please understand that any reference to black and white is not meant to be racial but is simply factual.

The greatest concentration of whites in Rhodesia was in 1975, when there were about 250,000 whites. As the war intensified, that number began to dwindle until settlement in 1979 and independence in 1980. It was reduced further by a massive emigration fuelled by white uncertainty over their future under a black dispensation.

Faced with the harsh reality of its sport threatened with extinction through dwindling numbers of its populace, the board of the then Zimbabwe Cricket Union decided, in 2001, to integrate cricket so that it could draw players from the majority [black] population of 13 million and infuse them with those from the remaining white population. This would create a national team whose membership reflected the racial diversity of Zimbabwe. In 2001, despite the racial composition of the country - 200,000 whites against 13 million blacks - only three blacks were in the national team and two on the board.

The board set up a task force to deal with the integration. The process was methodical. The Integration Task Force drew up a voluminous and thorough document that was the roadmap to integration. It was the work of countless meetings that were not grounded in emotion but reality. Notwithstanding the history of the country and the deprivation caused by its racist government and institutions, the task force was emphatic that there was to be no malice and no vengeance in this move to change Zimbabwe cricket for the good, indeed the survival, of the game and for the nation.

The integration document caused a lot of anxiety among the white players and their parents, and yet it was not supposed to do so. Allegations of quotas were totally unfounded as the task force never dictated numbers but worked on an evolutionary process that aimed at a gradual increase in the numbers of black players making it to the national teams as the board proceeded with its development programme that generated throughout.

 
 
"I can understand that, given the current state of our supposed playing standard, we are more prone to scrutiny than others, but it would not surprise me if a check of all the boards of the ICC Full Member countries showed ZC's to be the most apolitical"
 

Why were there disputes between factions then?
Misunderstandings did arise in the implementation of the programme, and a year later some of the white players rebelled against the administration. But this was not the first-ever such act by the players. It was just the first since integration began.

Then in 2004, Zimbabwe had its first-ever loss to Bangladesh at Harare Sports Club and the captain and selectors felt that the person responsible was Stuart Matsikenyeri. But the administrators of the then Mashonaland Cricket Association, who were predominantly black, said they would not allow the team to take to the field against Bangladesh without Matsikenyeri and were even prepared to dig up the pitch. Thankfully, sense prevailed.

A few days after the series ended, Heath Streak resigned as captain and the board accepted that resignation. The other white players then walked out en masse, saying that the selection process was not fair.

But this was not the first rebellion. In England years before, a then predominantly white side walked out en masse saying their salaries were less than that of a bus driver in the United Kingdom. The then board had to bring in Lord Weeden to chair talks with the players.

A few years later, this time in the West Indies, there was another stalemate, with the players saying they no longer wanted Dave Houghton as coach. These are just two incidents in a litany of unbridled player power gone awry.

Such was their power there were even camps within the players, referred to as "Royal Families", which included the likes of Andy and Grant Flower and Alistair Campbell.

I fail to understand how another player uprising under my watch is now seen as evidence of my being political.

At every moment, ZC maintained an open-door policy. After the 2004 incident, we set up a Dispute Resolution Committee chaired by a prominent legal practitioner, Addington Chinake, which made progress such that most of the players returned to play.

But that wasn't the end of it, was it?
Player power was to return when we played New Zealand in Bulawayo and lost a Test match in two days. We then sat down and said that as part of the remedial measures we were going to change contracts to make them performance-based. That set up another fight between the then players association and the board.

During that series, the board held its annual general meeting in Bulawayo and unanimously dismissed the coach, Phil Simmons, the manager and the selectors. That set up a new fight with the administrators [of the associations], who felt their grip on power was loosening, using players to fight their cause. They also alleged that we were changing the contract structure because we had misused ZC money.

It was the old trick of throwing as much mud as possible in the hope that some of it would stick.


"We have always believed in our players, and continue to believe in them" © AFP
Enlarge
 

Among these allegations were those of breaching the country's foreign currency regulations, which brought in the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe [RBZ]. Indeed there were violations, but these stretched to as far back as 1982 and so the courts convicted the body corporate.

Their other trick was to try to make the board ungovernable, and so those discontented administrators, who were board members, boycotted duly convened meetings.

The country's supreme sports regulatory authority, the Sports and Recreation Commission [SRC], was then forced to step in. You may want to find out who was keen for the SRC to be involved. It was certainly not me!

Having come in, the SRC used simple logic to break the impasse. On the basis that they had shown their goodwill to run the game, the Commission appointed onto an interim committee those members of the old board who had continued to come to meetings during the standoff. It added to that number other stakeholders.

If the SRC involvement in cricket was political because the organisation was set up by an Act of Parliament, was it political when the SRC was invited? In which case, those who invited it should accept blame for "politicising" the game, or did the involvement become political only because of the decision the SRC reached? In which case the accusation of politicisation should be dismissed as sour grapes.

As one of the terms of reference for the interim committee, a new constitution was drawn up which paved the way for a new democratically elected board inclusive of all the country's 10 provincial associations.

But it is claimed that elected board contained political figures.
Frankly speaking, ZC, like any other organisation, is made up of people who have various political views. I do not enquire of these views as it is not my business. In the same way as it is not your business to enquire about Giles Clarke's political affiliations. And it is not important. Democracy is founded on choice and whatever that choice is, it remains the prerogative of that individual.

In my own case, the truth of the matter is that, like every Zimbabwean, I will comment on issues, whether good or bad, that concern me. But I am not a politician and do not wish to be one. It goes beyond fiction for me to have a conversation with a journalist or player and afterwards tell them which political party I support.

Martin, you may as a British citizen be a Conservative or member of New Labour and I as an individual respect that. But for me to go out and, without cross-checking with you, start saying that just by the way you write you belong to this or that party is surely stretching matters.

For the record, undoubtedly Zanu-PF has been the dominant player on the Zimbabwe political stage before and after independence. Thus, it is not surprising that, at one time, the suggestion was made that the then prime minister be patron of the then Zimbabwe Cricket Union, and a largely white board unanimously accepted the nomination, sent him the invitation and vigorously campaigned for his acceptance. The letter is on file.

I can understand that, given the current state of our supposed playing standard, we are more prone to scrutiny than others, but it would not surprise me if a check of all the boards of the ICC Full Member countries showed ZC's to be the most apolitical.

If you are, as you say, apolitical, why were you and Peter Chingoka recently banned from entering Australia by the government there?
It's unfair to judge without trial. It is unfair to judge on the basis of innuendo. Your readers may know that until last year Nelson Mandela remained on the United States list of terrorists. A Nobel Peace Prize winner and a worldwide symbol of freedom a terrorist! And his democratically elected South African ruling party, the African National Congress, was classified as a terrorist organisation!

The lesson to draw from that is that one does not change one's principles simply on the basis of some people's reaction to them. If the principles are right, in time the holder will be vindicated.

If on the basis that I have fought for cricket to be a multi-racial sport I should be banned from entering certain countries, then I sleep with a clear conscience. Clearly it is better to be banned when I believe in the justice of my principle than to change that principle in return for entry.

What is your vision of the future for Zimbabwe cricket?
I am committed that in the not-so-distant future Zimbabwe takes its hard-earned place on the ICC ODI and Test rankings and that you and I will sit together then and have a drink and wonder about the years of disbelief, distortion and discouragement.

 
 
"If on the basis that I have fought for cricket to be a multi-racial sport I should be banned from entering certain countries, then I sleep with a clear conscience"
 

Sport is a cycle. Those on top will not always be there. Thus, Zimbabwe will not always be at the bottom. Our assumption of the dizzy heights may not happen in our lifetime but I am happy that we have laid the foundation for Zimbabwe teams to be selected from all over the country, regardless of race, colour or creed.

To help take the local game where we want it to go, we need the support, knowledge and assistance of the international cricket community. To promote cricket in Zimbabwe, Cricinfo can help by giving its readers a balanced analysis of what Zimbabwe Cricket is trying to achieve.

I am not asking for blinkered praise for our cricket, but there are many people who, on a daily basis, work with me in difficult circumstances to build the game in this country. It is only fair that their achievements be recognised.

Just this last season, I have watched with great pleasure the spinning abilities of Prosper Utseya and Ray Price, noted with pride Tatenda Taibu's selection for the Indian Premier League, noticed the dedication and improvement that Elton [Chigumbura] is showing in both his batting and bowling, the prowess of Hamilton [Masakadza] with the willow and the abundant all-round promise in Sean Williams.

But even as I enjoyed all that, I have continued to work with my management and staff to ensure that, next season and the others to come, the game will remain accessible to anyone who wants to play it.

This is because, long after the fanfare over Zimbabwe politics is ended, cricket will still be played here.

At the ICC meeting recently, the report into the state of the game said that it could be up to two years before Zimbabwe was ready to resume playing Test cricket. Is that reasonable?
We still have some work to do with regards to returning to Test cricket, I think the time frame that all our stakeholders are agreeable on is anything between six months and two years. We will, however, endeavour to ensure that it will be under two years. So the ICC comment is fair and we do not dispute it.

Finally, how heartened have you been by recent results?
I am obviously pleased that the boys are starting to show maturity. We have always believed in them and continue to believe in them. We think that if they continue to play competitive cricket more regularly, their standard will be at a level where we will all be happy.

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

RSS Feeds: Martin Williamson

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by JackJ on (February 11, 2009, 15:24 GMT)

It would be very difficult for anyone to get things more wrong than NomDeplume. This bloke is clearly a sycophant of Mugabe and all he stands for. There's no way Zim will be a test player again in 2 years, not in 10 years. They're not good enough, end of story. They suffered, under Rhodesians? Must be living in Alice land. Zim was the 2nd most prosperous land in Africa during the Rhodesian days. Today many Zims have expressed the wish that those days could return! They suffered under sanctions? Absolutely! It was necessary to get rid of Mugabe, just as sanctions got rid of apartheid. Bvute is an apparatchik of Zanu-PF. He knows zip about cricket. He was put there by Mugabe a few years ago when the white players walked out. He is part of the politicisation of Zim cricket. These days he has 3 functions: 1 To ensure Zanu policy gets followed. 2 To ensure that a big portion of the ICC $9 million+ handout goes to Zanu. 3 To ensure that Chingoka follows the party line. Thats the truth.

Posted by Trevort on (February 11, 2009, 12:55 GMT)

Come one, LadyK! Surely if the players had not been paid they would be the first to say so?

Posted by LadyK on (February 10, 2009, 19:12 GMT)

Interesting that the interviewer did not mention the question of money. Have any Zimbabwe players been paid lately?

Posted by MCG2008 on (February 10, 2009, 15:09 GMT)

There is a spelling mistake in the heading: Yield was spelt with a 'W'!

Posted by Fireballz on (February 10, 2009, 2:51 GMT)

Pretty laughable that he compares himself and his mates to Nelson Mandela. There's a lot of spin in his answers and a lot of talking about stuff that is of a completely different nature (ie; the Heath Streak-led rebellion in comparison to the English pay dispute) in order to attempt to put discontent with the current situation into perspective. However I am not convinced one bit. A very good interview though, very impartial and allowed readers to draw their own conclusions. Very interesting indeed!

Posted by NomDePlume on (February 9, 2009, 18:50 GMT)

Excellent interview. Hopefully Zimbabwe will be a Test team in the next two years. They have suffered enough, first under slavery, the Rhodesians and now the sanctions game played by the ex-Rhodesians in Australia and England. It is great contrast to see the earnestness and humility of Mr. Bvute when compared with the arrogance and hatred of the ex-Rhodesians.

Posted by regsaxelby on (February 9, 2009, 18:33 GMT)

Well done for getting the interview but there is alot missing here. For example, what about Malcolm Speed's resignation from the ICC over Zimbabwe? More simply, where has all the money gone? Bvute can see which way the wind is blowing and is trying to position himself for the blessed day when his political masters are tossed onto the scrapheap.

Posted by robheinen on (February 9, 2009, 9:42 GMT)

Truth be in the middle of the picture painted by this interview and the images from zimbabwe put on the television screen by the news agents.....

In the end everyone has to answer to their own conscience and the universe will be the measure of heaven or.......life.

Posted by Ralph_McTell on (February 9, 2009, 8:39 GMT)

An excellent interview to set up - thanks! Very interesting. Who knows what to believe or disbelieve?

I'm sure most of us would like to see Zimbabwean cricket return to test standard. Let's hope it happens one day - the current team certainly has the talent to win ODIs and 20-20s.

Posted by saame on (February 9, 2009, 5:29 GMT)

It would be great if zimbabwe could become a good competitive side not only for the game of cricket but for the country it's self. but the problem is that they don't have the players to come back into test cricket and if they do rerurn to test cricket in the next 1 to 2 years they would prob be getting beat in 2 to 3 days like they were before if they are going to be playing teams like Australia or South Africa. But they do have some promising Willams i think is a test standard batsman. The dream of zimabwe be a good cricket team sounds great but will it ever happen?

Comments have now been closed for this article

FeedbackTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Martin WilliamsonClose
Martin Williamson Executive editor Martin Williamson joined the Wisden website in its planning stages in 2001 after failing to make his millions in the internet boom when managing editor of Sportal. Before that he was in charge of Sky Sports Online and helped launch and run Sky News Online. With a preference for all things old (except his wife and children), he has recently confounded colleagues by displaying an uncharacteristic fondness for Twenty20 cricket. His enthusiasm for the game is sadly not matched by his ability, but he remains convinced that he might be a late developer and perseveres in the hope of an England call-up with his middle-order batting and non-spinning offbreaks. He is now managing editor of ESPN EMEA Digital Group as well as his Cricinfo responsibilities.

    Gower savours life in the last chance saloon

Rewind: David Gower was on the verge of being dropped for good in 1990 when he made a charismatic century against India

    The diggers' doctor

Ashley Mallett: One of few non-cricketers to share a bond with Don Bradman was a South Australian doctor, Donald Beard

    For the love of cricket grounds

Review: A diligent examination of grounds in Britain that no longer host first-class cricket

'He's got no real weaknesses'

Modern Masters: Rahul Dravid and Sanjay Manjrekar discuss Jacques Kallis' terrific record in all conditions

Coming back to win from hopeless first-innings situations

Anantha Narayanan: A look at some of the most thrilling victorious fightbacks in Tests

News | Features Last 7 days

India look for their Indian summer

Billboards are calling the series England's Indian Summer, but it is India who are looking for that period of warmth, redemption after the last whitewash, for they have seen how bleak the winter that can follow is

South Africa face the Kallis question

Accommodation for a great player like Jacques Kallis should be made with careful consideration and South Africa cannot get carried away with sentiment

India's bowling leader conundrum

The present Indian bowling line-up will tackle its first five-Test series without the proven guidance of Zaheer Khan, their bowling captain. India had unravelled without him in 2011. Will they do better this time around?

Five key head-to-heads

From two embattled captains to the challenge for India's openers against the new ball, ESPNcricinfo picks five contests that could determine the series

Packed tours, and Shiv's late stumping

Also, best post-war win/loss record, most runs in two calendar years, most ducks in a Test, and brothers with similar numbers

News | Features Last 7 days

    India look for their Indian summer (87)

    Billboards are calling the series England's Indian Summer, but it is India who are looking for that period of warmth, redemption after the last whitewash, for they have seen how bleak the winter that can follow is

    South Africa face the Kallis question (56)

    Accommodation for a great player like Jacques Kallis should be made with careful consideration and South Africa cannot get carried away with sentiment

    India's bowling leader conundrum (44)

    The present Indian bowling line-up will tackle its first five-Test series without the proven guidance of Zaheer Khan, their bowling captain. India had unravelled without him in 2011. Will they do better this time around?

    Why isn't Ashwin playing? (34)

    It's close to inexplicable how India's best spinner is being left out in favour of bits-and-pieces players

    Five key head-to-heads (33)

    From two embattled captains to the challenge for India's openers against the new ball, ESPNcricinfo picks five contests that could determine the series