Dreamcricket USA News

USACA's proposal diverges from ICC in timing and content

2017 Mar 12 by DreamCricket USA

Cricket is mainly about exquisite shots executed with perfect timing.   USACA has not burdened itself with either strategy or timing over the last decade.

By Venu Palaparthi

Cricket is mainly about exquisite shots executed with perfect timing.   USACA has not burdened itself with either strategy or timing over the last decade in regards to how it plays its shots.  
In June of 2015, the ICC’s suspension of USACA brought on 39 reinstatement conditions.  With the field set so tightly, everyone thought the organization would stop playing risky shots.  Nearly two years later, USACA has continued to occupy the crease untroubled by conditions of play. 
Last month, the ICC Board asked USACA to place its proposed constitution in front of its membership for adoption on or before April 1, 2017 and to stage the elections for the initial Board (subject to full independent audit) under the new constitution by September 20, 2017.  Failure to do so might result in expulsion.  Once again, USACA appears to be oblivious about timing or placement of its shots.

Instead of sticking to the ICC recommended timeline, USACA has set a more relaxed schedule for itself.  A special general meeting, to be held on April 8, 2017, will consider an amended constitution by members in good standing.   The first election under the USACA proposal is slated for February 2018, six months later than the date set by the ICC.   Of course, it is not even a certainty that USACA’s membership will accept the proposed amendments.  The organization’s constituents have rejected similar changes over the past decade. 
Despite the lack of urgency, the most recent communication from USACA’s Executive Secretary indicates that the organization may finally have opened its eyes to the requirements of the US Olympic and Amateur Sports Act.
“The proposed new constitution is presented to the membership to satisfy a condition of reinstatement imposed by the ICC, and will bring USACA into compliance with the requirements of the United States Olympic and Amateur Sports Act (the “Ted Stevens Act”) and changes in the New York Not-For Profit Corporation Law,” Sankar Renganathan, the USACA Secretary, wrote in an email sent to its member leagues. 
The USACA’s draft constitution that was attached to the email contains several meaningful improvements over the current constitution.   But it deviates from some of the details of the ICC's constitutional proposal that were made public by the international governing body in a recent release in three key areas – 1) the indepedence of the Chairperson at the start of the implementation of the new constitution 2) the number of Directors representing Individual Members and 3) the number of Directors representing the Leagues.  Also, the USACA plan for zonal administration seems at first glance like 'more of the same.'   I will come to that later in a separate article.
For what it is worth, here is a quick comparative analysis of the constitution developed by the Sustainable Foundation Advisory Group (SFAG) with inputs from the ICC and the version put to vote by USACA. 
Improvement ICC/SFAG Proposal USACA Proposal DreamCricket Comments
Number of Directors 10 in all comprising:
3 Independents (at least one Female)
3 Individual Directors
1 Female Player
1 Male player
1 League Director
1 Club Director
10 to begin with comprising:

3 Independent (No requirement for Female)

1 Individual Director
1 Female Player
1 Male Player
3 League Directors
1 Club Director
On the face of it, the ICC/SFAG proposal offers a greater degree of change following a new election and wider representation than the USACA model.   
Chairperson One of the three independent directors to be elected by the Board to become chairperson during the first three years. The Board elects the Chairperson.  Independence of Chairperson is not a criterion at the start.   Independence of the Chairperson is definitely a defining characteristic of the ICC/SFAG plan.
Independent Directors Three independent directors of whom at least one must be female director, completely independent from governance and administration for at least the last three years, enabling the organization to recruit skill sets and experiences that would otherwise not be represented on the Board.  USACA proposal is nearly identical to the ICC/SFAG proposal. The two proposals are very similar.
Individual Directors Three (3) Individual Directors to be elected by the entire Individual Membership (other than the International Players), thereby introducing the prospect of every Individual Member across the country having the right to directly influence who should represent them on the Board. The USACA proposal contemplates only 1 Individual Director for the first three election cycles.  The USACA proposal appears to be reluctant to grant broader representation  to individual members, in effect, ceding greater control to the traditional league representatives.
International Player  Directors One Male and one Female Director elected by the International Players who have represented USA at an international event sanctioned by the ICC over the last ten years.  One Male and one Female Director.
For the Female Director, the USACA proposal allows anyone who has represented  any country other than the US as long as the the person is a citizen or permanent resident of the U.S. at the time of member registration/renewal.
The objective of the USACA proposal is noteworthy because it expands eligibility for Female Director opening the opportunity to a bigger pool of candidates.
Treasurer The Treasurer does not appear to be an elected position as per the summary version of the ICC/SFAG proposal published by the ICC. The Treasurer must be a member of the Board of Directors and must be elected by the Board. USACA’s proposal is consistent with other US sports bodies such as US Soccer Federation. 
League/Club Engagement The Board shall comprise 1 League Director and a Club Director.  In addition, a separate league committee comprising 2 representatives from two biggest leagues in each of the six zones. The Board shall comprise 3 League Directors initially and 1 Club Director.  Over time, the number of League Directors drops to 1 after 2020.  In addition, a separate league committee comprising 2 representatives from two  leagues in each of the six zones and three Player Director appointees who are National Players. The ICC/SFAG plan has better representation of Individual Members at the start whereas the USACA plan gives greater representation to the Leagues until 2020, which is not quite status quo but is closer to the present failed approach than the ICC plan.