USA Cricketer : John Aaron

Everest ACS are Eastern American Cricket Association Power 40 Division A champions

openingbat — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:26:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

By Sam Sooppersaud

The Everest ACS cricket organization added yet another piece of hardware to their trophy cabinet when they crushed the Atlantis Cricket Organization in the 2012 Eastern American Cricket Association Power 40 Division "A" Final on Sunday, September 2. The match was played at the Baisely Park Cricket Field, Foch Boulevard and Long Street, Jamaica, New York.

After Everest ACS batted and posted a mammoth score in their inning the Atlantis batsmen were literally caged as the bowlers exercised total domination. Nobody was able to suggest a plausible reason for the failure of the Atlantis batting machine which included several centurions as well as a double-centurion.

Pic (Right): Everest ACS skipper Karan Ganesh led from the front with a blistering 88 which included 7 fours and 6 sixes. He then followed up with a bowling tally of 2 for 17. [Picture appears courtesy of Shiek Mohamed of NewYorkCricket.com]

On paper the Atlantis club fielded a better side than their rival, double centurion Nicholas Standford, the hard-hitting Henderson Blades, Alex Amsterdam, who once played for the Guyana National (Rest) Eleven; the destructive Kavishwar Bridgepaul; the wily left arm spinner, skipper Prasant Nair; the menacing pacer, Dwayne Hurley, just to name a few of the Atlantis stars.

Everest ACS combined older and younger players. Senior players like the former USA captain, Zamin Amin, Terry Hastoo, Saeed Amin, Trevor Walke, playing alongside youngsters like Greg Sewdial, a USA Under-19 player, Skipper Karan Ganesh, Shafeek Shaw. Player for player Altantis appeared to have the edge, but a cricket game is won on the field and not on potential. In this game, Atlantis did not perform.

Speaking after the game, Atlantis CC executive John Aaaron, when asked to sum up the game, said: " Everest ACS deserved to win. They batted and bowled well. We just didn't perform".

An unusually large crowd was on hand to witness the clash of the two most notable and well-organized clubs in the EACA. Both clubs have been around for decades and have won their share of championships during those years. Among the fans were EACA's long reigning president, Rudy Persaud, the workhorse of the EACA, Kris Persaud, the Regional Representative to USACA; NY Regional Director, Lester Hooper, who is an executive with the Atlantis club.

Milton Pydanna, a former West Indies ODI batsman/wicketkeeper took in the game while having a spirited conversation with several fans sitting within his proximity. Of course, the unofficial cook of the Everest ACS, 'Blair' Amin, the father of Zamin and Saeed Amin, as usual, was there giving loud vocal support to the members of his favorite team. John Aaron, the distinguished former Executive Secretary of USACA, was there. Players from numerous clubs in the EACA turned out in large numbers along with their club supporters. All came out to watch the "Clash of the Titans".

Everest ACS took first knock. Steve Nowrangilall and Shafeek Shaw opened the account for their team. By the end of the fifth over both were back in the showers, courtesy of medium pacer, Nicholas Sandford. With the score reading 29 for 2, Sewdial and Tamesh Balwant solidified the innings with a third wicket partnership that was worth 99 runs.

Balwant played the supporting role relegating the main role to the destructively hard-hitiing Sewdial. How destructive he was! Judge for yourselves. In his first 35 runs Sewdial hit 6 fours and a 6 while facing only 15 balls. Balwant (34) was then caught attempting a needless slog to long on with the score reading 128 for 3.

Skipper Karan Ganesh walked out to the crease. He had some anxious moments initially. In fact he should have been out before he had scored in the double figures. A misjudged skier dropped harmlessly to the turf. Gregory Sewdial and Karan Ganesh appeared to turn up their assault on the hapless bowlers a few notches. Greg was hitting fours while his skipper preferred to hit the ball over the fence for sixes.

With the fall of Sewdial's wicket the score read 168 for 4. Sewdial's contribution was a crushing 91 runs, hitting 15 fours and a lone six. Karan Ganesh continued to plunder the bowling attack; his favorite shot, hitting the ball over the fence. Zamin Amin "added salt to the wound" by hitting 22 runs in 19 balls. Ganesh finally was caught attempting yet another big hit. His 88 runs included seven fours and six sixes. The Everest ACS innings closed at 281 for 8.

At one stage of the Everest ACS innings it appeared that the Atlentis players were experiencing some frustration judging from their body language. The batsmen were toying with their bowlers while their fielders were grassing possible catches and mishandling grounders. Bowling for Atlantis Alex Amsterdam bagged 5 wickets for 58 runs in his 8 overs. Nick Standford ( 2 for 53) and Prasant Nair ( 1 for 51) accounted for the other wickets to have fallen.

Having to score 282 runs for victory in 40 overs (a run rate of over 7 runs per over) is indeed a daunting task considering the slow outfield. But Atlantis started on a positive note. The first ball Henderson Blades faced from medium pacer Trevor Walke was dispatched over the longon boudary for a massive six. The ball had to be retrieved from nearly a block away from the boundary fence.

Then in the third over Mason was caught playing a tentative stroke. He appeared to have changed his mind mid way through the shot and offered a diving catch to Greg Sewdial on the long-on boundary.

Wickets continued to fall at regular interval at one end while Nick Stanford offered a beligerent resistant. He clubbed three massive sixes and one four during his time in the crease scoring 33 runs. Henderson Blades made 23 runs while while number eight batsman, Sukhdeo hit 22. The Atlantis innings closed at 128 in 24.2 overs as they were outplayed by Everest ACS who for the second straight year took home the Eastern American Cricket Association championship.

The bowling honors for Everest ACS were shared by Zamin Amin (4 for 20 in 4.2 overs), Saeed Amin (2 for 49 in 8 overs), Trevor Walke (2 for 42 in 8 overs). Skipper Karan Ganesh (2 for 17 in 4 overs) while scoring 88 runs surely deserved the Man of the Match award.

Ram Varadarajan announces candidacy. Offers 'bold new plan' for leadership.

openingbat — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:48:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

Comments

In an exclusive interview with DreamCricket.com, California businessman Ram Varadarajan announces his plan to run for president of USACA. The first half of the interview is below. Part two will be published on Thursday.

DreamCricket: Thanks for agreeing to speak to DreamCricket.com and for announcing your candidacy on our website. It has been an eventful three years for you personally. On the professional front, the company you founded in 1997, Arcot Systems, was sold to CA Technologies. Reportedly in an all cash transaction valued at $200 million. How do you feel about that?

RV: It is always good to have the fruits of one’s labor be rewarded. I am happy for myself and all the stakeholders - employees, partners, investors and customers. My team at Arcot and I had spent a decade building this business from the proverbial Silicon Valley startup on a napkin into one of the most respected security and anti-fraud solutions company in the world. Building a successful company is all about leadership, team building, fund raising, gaining confidence in your stock holders and meeting the expectations of your customers. Equally important are qualities such as – highest level of ethical conduct, transparency and communication. I am glad I could, with my team, achieve all of these.

Arcot has a great future, the business continues to do very well and my team is continuing our mission with renewed vigor. While I am still actively engaged with the business at Arcot, I no longer have the pressures that an entrepreneur CEO has. I have the freedom and bandwidth to pursue my interest in US cricket more vigorously. And I truly believe that the lessons and successes of my decade at Arcot can all be put to work once again to make USACA a world class sports institution.

DreamCricket: The perception within USACA circles is that you have stayed away from cricket since you lost the election to Gladstone Dainty. In fact, some think you completely disappeared from the scene until now. What do you tell critics who think you have reemerged around election time?

RV: As I said after the 2008 election, there is a time for politics, but when the political season ends, we need to work together and put cricket first. Because, as you know, cricket in USA has plenty of politics, what it really needs is development.

Gladstone Dainty and the newly elected team got their chance to provide leadership. Had I won that election, I would have expected the same opportunity.

DreamCricket: But since you were not front and center over the last three years, maybe that has led to the perception that you have left the cricketing scene.

RV: Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have not stayed away from cricket and will always serve cricket.

Since the last elections, I have remained active at various levels. I have continued my involvement at the grass roots level in NWR. Nationally, I have supported various cricket initiatives – especially youth activities. I advised sports marketing entities to bring professional cricket to the US. I advised USACA officials on fund raising – even arranging senior level meetings with a key potential sponsor.

I held the first of its kind national forum on youth cricket to stitch together the various youth activities – several good things came out of it including a national repository for cricket statistics – a key finding of that forum. This national statistical repository, which DreamCricket.com is hosting, is financed by my foundation. Additionally several institutions got valuable advice on incorporating as 501(c)3 organizations – increasing their ability to raise funds.

I could go on and on, but I guess the point is that I have been, and will continue to be involved in making USA cricket one of the most successful and vibrant cricket organizations in the world. I know it is a very long haul, but I am certain we will get there. So as I said, I have been in the thick of cricket. Probably, the right thing to say would be that I stayed away from the media and have certainly not been heavily involved politically since the last elections.

DreamCricket: Tell us more about your foundation. Why did you start the New Inning Foundation? What are its activities?

RV: There are plenty of small, individual, laudatory initiatives across America to help grow cricket. But there were none that dreamt big and followed up with execution. My vision is that the success and growth of cricket in USA lies in putting significant money, time, effort, and focus on youth cricket. New Inning Foundation has been created with that single objective in mind. There was certainly a need for a philanthropic foundation devoted to promoting, nourishing and celebrating youth cricket in America. New Inning Foundation achieves this by working symbiotically with community organizations whilst leveraging our financial and administrative resources. The funding is provided by me and a few private donors.

The New Inning Foundation has begun in earnest. Its initial focus is on highlighting and recognizing talent at the youth level. Towards that end we set up the national score repository for youth cricket statistics – it now contains scorecards for youth games at regional and national levels. Over time, this repository has been expanded to all inter-regional and ICC cricket. Now that all the scores are recorded, it also enhances transparency when it comes to selection.

Image (right) - Ram Varadarajan

The other thing it enables us to do as a community is to recognize and celebrate talent. The New Inning Foundation was also among the presenters of the USA Cricket Awards last year. In 2010, 10 cricketers were selected for their achievement including such assessments as performing under pressure and commitment. Awards comprised of a plaque and a cash reward.

New Inning Foundation has established scholarships for free indoor net-practice for deserving junior cricketers. The foundation has also supported the expansion of the USYCA and facilitated equipment donations to schools across USA, funded printing of instructional booklets and promotional material by USYCA for students and teachers.

Also, New Inning Foundation has campaigned very hard and been successful in influencing tournament organizations in US cities to take on youth players – by supporting tournament level awards that recognize youth achievement.

We have also supported college assistance programs for youth players.

I see New Inning Foundation becoming a significant contributor to youth cricket development across America, touching the lives of many aspiring cricketers in this country. It is a first of its kind institution in the US and perhaps worldwide.

DreamCricket: That is very impressive and the USA cricket community appreciates your support of the awards. Coming back to the election in 2008, are you still in touch with the three gentlemen who were on your slate who won that election - John Thickett, John Aaron and Manaf Mohamed. Do you think they delivered on the promises that were made last time around as part of the New Inning mandate?

RV: I am indeed in touch with them as I am with several key actors in US cricket – both in person and electronically. I brainstorm with them on several cricket topics including ways to get USACA on a sound financial footing. These are good friends that I can lean on for ideas. In fact, the successes (albeit few) of the last 3 years have been led or championed by these gentlemen – formation of Cricket Holdings America LLC, being one poignant example.

DreamCricket: How do you rate USACA’s performance over the last three years under the leadership of Mr. Gladstone Dainty?

RV: I contested the last election; I am contesting this one. The reasons are largely the same. I feel that USACA management has lacked structure, organizational leadership and transparency. Over the last three years, we have not really seen a common vision as a result of which problems big and small remain unsolved. A consequence of all of this is that there is factionalism, confusion and despair among the cricket lovers, players, volunteers and elected officials. US cricket could have been taken to greater heights and our youth given the opportunities they deserved. My campaign is therefore about addressing all of these. I am confident that I can remedy this.

In the midst of all this, we must not forget that a few bright spots did appear. Women’s cricket got a start. The Pearls Cup was a good one-off event. I like the revival of the KA Auty Cup. The establishment of Cricket Holdings America LLC was clearly a singular major achievement and I am proud to say that members on my 2008 slate were instrumental is bringing this about along with the President and the board. This did bring much needed funds allowing for many of the cricket tours that the U-19, men and women have made. But increased activity also leads to increased expectations - governance & execution need to keep up with that.

I want to look forward – I know that the situation can be improved significantly. It starts with the top - leadership bringing the cricket community together – that will establish the right priorities, formulate the right structure, team and governance, and energize the participants to take things to the next level.

In my view, the leadership should serve the leagues and has to explain the benefit of the decisions to the membership. More efficient communications are naturally very important, which means the President and the board must seek and take input, be open to criticism. USACA must bring value to the leagues beyond just the right to play for the region or for the US team.

DreamCricket: How did you get involved with CHA, LLC? What is your role as a board member?

RV: As I mentioned earlier, I advised entities that wanted to bring professional cricket to US. I was, therefore, educated in the challenges and opportunities that the LLC presented. Here I was, sitting in the Silicon Valley, home to some of the greatest success stories in corporate America. My own story at Arcot Systems is akin to other Silicon Valley success stories. And I told myself that I must deploy that spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship to cricket administration. Cricket Holdings America LLC presented me with that opportunity. And I accepted. Since being part of Cricket Holdings America LLC, I have executed my duties with the same passion, commitment and leadership that I had for Arcot.

DreamCricket: What is your answer to critics that think that you have been 'silenced' by Mr. Dainty by hanging a CHA board position as a carrot? We have seen a lot of criticism lately centered on how the USACA board was not consulted in making board appointments.

RV: I contested “Dainty the President” in the last elections. I have nothing against “Dainty the person”. I talked to him then, and I talk to him now. I have never been afraid to be critical about the quality of his administration or about decisions made by the administration. So let that be on record. The fact that Dainty invited me to be part of CHA goes to show that I am issue-based and not personality-based.

Now, about the USACA board, the workings of the USACA board are outside my knowledge and influence. There could be several reasons for discord on the USACA board over such appointments including mine – speculating over them is not fruitful.

From my standpoint, I was invited by USACA to take a board seat on Cricket Holdings America LLC. I gave it thought and I accepted because I felt that I was fully qualified to join the board and I was confident that I could add value to the board. The USACA board approved.

I am positive that many of the board members that had misgivings about the process that USACA adopted actually have no issues with my candidature or selection - I am very confident of that. Let me also make it very clear – my services are pro bono – there is absolutely no compensation for my time and effort and I expect none.

DreamCricket: Did you not file your nomination to run for the Regional Representative of the North West Region? Why did you withdraw, preferring instead to join the board of CHA, LLC?

RV: I believe USACA had an objective to expand the number of individuals involved in USACA activities. I was told they did not want one person holding two posts. I could continue to help the NWR region in many ways without having the Regional Representative post – and there were several outstanding individuals interested in the position.

The CHA board position was an entire new way to serve US cricket interests; I felt I was uniquely qualified and I am privileged to serve. I will serve US cricket at every opportunity that I have.

DreamCricket: Coming to the process or deficiency of processes at USACA, what would you have done differently? Do you feel that the USACA governance would have been more transparent had you been at the helm? With respect to the commercial deals and with respect to consensus building that has been lacking.

RV: Instead of indulging in hypotheses, let me tell you what I will do differently to immediately improve transparency and confidence. I have a bold new plan for governance and leadership. I will delineate, decentralize, and bring about transparency. Let me explain:

On “delineation”: First, I will separate executive management of USACA from cricket administration. The latter should be left to experts who should work without interference from the executive. The process of appointment of coaches, selectors, selection criteria, etc., these are administrative duties and these processes will be transparent and published.
Second, I will personally take up the job of mending our fences with the ICC and seek their active financial and governance help in putting USACA back on track. Third, I will introduce term limits: Presidents – max of two terms. Term limits are important for smart governance.

Coming to decentralization, USACA has become a large organization and it needs organizational acumen befitting its size. I will delegate more to the VPs and other board members. Everyone in my team will have a well-established portfolio of duties and responsibilities. I will let them perform their duties without interference but with a clear expectation of accountability and ethics. I will also move decision making and funds to the leagues and regions, as a rule. Decentralization also would mean that the administration would have to become more predictable – cricket calendars, board meetings and the like should be on a schedule. Once again, not rocket science; that is how successful companies operate.

Finally, I will bring about transparency. In my administration, all board meetings will have an open and closed session. Most of the cricket business can be discussed in open sessions. The open session will be open to all the league presidents. After all, the board is working on their behalf. This in itself will make the working of the board more civilized and productive –the league presidents can see for themselves what is going on. In the closed session, we will discuss any confidential aspects and personnel matters. The structure, conduct and governance of this board will be no different than how it is done in all successful companies globally. Also, in an effort to improve transparency, I will have town hall meetings every quarter so that the broader cricket community can come together, ask, criticize and learn.

This is a short list but this is how I think change can be ushered in. As President, my role will be to set the right tone at the top. Everything else follows from there.

______________________

Part 2

DreamCricket: Let us talk about the brief and stuttering engagement with the international community.

RV: Having international exposure is critically important for advancing US cricket. That is one reason why our relationship with the ICC needs to be rock solid.

There are two types of international exposure – one where we get professional teams to play in the US – once again, The Pearls Cup is an example of this. Under the LLC agreement, such activity will be organized and managed by the Cricket Holdings America LLC.

The Pearls Cup was a watershed event. It validated that USA could be a destination for cricket and that we could conduct such an event. The event, ground and the financial results from the event clearly need to be improved – however, it provided a critical learning.

The second is where our cricket players play with teams from other nations. The bilateral matches against Jamaica, Canada are all very good for our players. We cannot improve as a team by just playing ICC tournaments.

I also applaud the resumption of the K.A. Auty Cup for another reason. It is a long overdue celebration of a truly historic series. I think USA vs. Canada tradition, with some good marketing, can recapture some of the past glory.

DreamCricket: Do we need a CEO? What are your thoughts on Don Lockerbie's departure?

RV: Absolutely, the role of the CEO is critical for any organization and USACA is no exception. If elected, one of my top priorities will be to fill that post with a competent, committed and respected individual.

I worked well with Mr. Lockerbie. Very soon after his appointment, I met with him and offered my assistance. We discussed various options and strategies – including ways of raising funds for USACA. I am not privy to the exact circumstances leading to his departure.

DreamCricket: What makes you want to contest again? How different is this election from the last one in 2008?

RV: I ran last time because I did not see any other candidate stepping in to lead or bringing change to US cricket. There was a leadership vacuum. There were plenty of folks critical of the then president’s performance – but nobody was willing to make the effort to challenge the status quo. So I stepped in to serve US cricket. I think it was a watershed event.

The campaign that I ran was exemplary. I was a virtual unknown and I invested time to meet league presidents and the cricket community, understanding issues and putting together a slate of candidates from across the country and more importantly I spelt out a platform – that platform is still visible at www.newinning.com

This time, the situation is more acute and the stakes are higher. However, this time the electorate is more informed. The change that is required is more than just running tournaments and complaining. It is more fundamental. It is about restoring cricket to its glorious track in the US. It is about having the leadership, vision and the executive skills to manage a set of diverse interests. I am confident that I can deliver on all those grounds.

DreamCricket: Last time around, you lost by three votes. In fact, one vote in your favor was knocked out due to a technical disqualification. Much has been written about a handful of bogus leagues in 2008, especially in Central East region. Do you agree that things would have turned out differently if bogus leagues were not allowed to vote? What needs to change with respect to the voting process?

RV: The way I see it, I lost by three votes in spite of my message being spot on. There were structural reasons for the loss. First, as you pointed out, there were several fake leagues and they were obviously not voting for me. Second, some legitimate leagues were disqualified from voting on technicalities – if they were allowed to vote, they would have likely supported me. Third, I am a skeptic when it comes to proxy voting. This is pure evil.

What most readers don’t realize is that in the USACA elections proxy voting is allowed. That means a league president can sign over his ballot to another influential official, say a regional director. There is inherently a fear of reprisal. The regional director may retaliate against a league within the region if the league does not vote for the candidate supported by the regional director. This practice must stop. All voting must be by secret ballot. USACA must set aside funds for the league presidents to travel and vote in person. Or they must authenticate the vote through other means. Technology has evolved to facilitate that.

Of late, there is a drive to review the legitimacy of the leagues. I welcome this compliance drive. Had it been in place three years ago, I am confident that I would be the incumbent President.

DreamCricket: What is the way forward in the current situation? People want an election but it is an open secret that there are bogus leagues.

RV: We need a strict, fair and expeditious way to root out the egregious violators. People are skeptical of the current compliance process for a variety of reasons and some of the critics view it as a political tool to silence opponents. The skepticism also stems from timing - it is an election year. I can understand why people are frustrated. But as I have said, we must give this compliance process a chance.

If your question is should we have not initiated a compliance examination sooner, absolutely, I would say yes. USACA should have encouraged a compliance mindset all along, and the membership process should have been well thought through from the beginning.

But once again, we have no option but to look at the future and the changes we want to bring in. If elected, one of the top priorities of my administration will be to make sure that membership is handled in an even handed, transparent, consultative and fair manner.

DreamCricket: USACA published a revised election timeline after the board meeting this past weekend. Do you think the election will be held according to this new schedule?

RV: I am certain it will. The electorate wants an election this year. Remember, the league presidents are the boss – the constitution is the law - not the president or board.

DreamCricket: Of late, there has been a lot of unpleasantness. Elections voided; massive distrust on the board; the Secretary has been suspended. Central East’s regional representative is awaiting recognition despite being voted to this role by a majority of the Central East’s leagues. Atlantic Region’s fate hangs in balance. How will you deal with such a thing if it happens under your watch?

RV: Leadership is about bringing people together towards a common mission. Factions arise when there is no transparency or communication about goals and the process to achieve them. It is simple, but has to be practiced diligently. I will run an administration where the objectives are that it be transparent, accepting of criticism, and predictable.

DreamCricket: But what do you think of the leadership and their methods such as suspension and locking out opponents. How do you feel about that?

RV: Clearly organizational cohesiveness has eluded USACA, so the methods of old have not worked. The beliefs that have worked for me are being transparent, inclusive, fair, and process driven. It worked for me for 30 years of my professional life, and an even longer personal life. I don’t see those beliefs failing me when I am the President of USACA.

DreamCricket: On the field, in the last three years, starting off at Division 5, USA went to 2011 Division 3 but was relegated to 2012 Division 4. In the U-19 WCQ held in Ireland, USA finished seventh among the associates failing to qualify. What is your assessment?

RV: This is clearly a cause for worry. I have spoken personally to US coaches. The good news is that I have been assured that we have the requisite raw skill set in the US. What is not present is the supporting infrastructure to amplify it, polish it and turn it into a winning machine.

Let me explain – USACA has done nothing to improve playing conditions – there is no increase in turf wickets, the number of qualified coaches and umpires have not increased in any meaningful way. Even when assistance from the ICC is available – these are being frittered away in mismanagement. We have to increase the pool of qualified players and have a well understood selection process so that players understand that skills and performance will be rewarded. Umpiring too should be consistent and standards are urgently needed.

I also believe that we need to redouble our efforts to attract a greater cross section of US society to cricket. I have been encouraging this by supporting Jamie Harrison’s efforts at USYCA - with schools across the country – for which I have been bestowed the “Patron of Youth Cricket” honor. Similarly, we need to redouble our efforts to attract girls to cricket and continue to nurture our nascent efforts with women players.

We also need to encourage and equip US teams to play the 20/20 format without taking away from other formats. This format will become an important avenue for professional cricket in the US and our players need every opportunity to make a mark and be noticed in this format.

DreamCricket: What needs to be done for the players? How will you change things at the age-group level and senior level?

RV: USA has shown that once it focuses on a sport, it can improve its rankings on merit. The best place to start this is at age-group level where disparity among talent is not so huge that it cannot be bridged through channeling resources. I will make such resources available both at national and league levels. By delineating executive management from cricket professionals – there will be a clear separation of duties. The cricket experts and the players themselves will guide us on the coaching, facilities, stipends, match practice and other needs of players. I will, along with the rest of the executive management, generate the funding to fulfill these needs.

In my view, there is nothing to prevent the US U-19 team from placing in the top four by 2020. That means we need to start in 2012 at the U11 level. Once we aim for that, the success in the adult tournaments will follow naturally.

Being on the board of the CHA LLC, I also see another advantage that we can bring to bear – we can provide a professional career path for US cricket players.

DreamCricket: There were some positive steps like bringing in Dipak Patel to coach the U-19 squad for the 2010 U-19 World Cup in New Zealand, Robin Singh was brought in to coach the U-19 team in Ireland, etc. Of course, a lot of money was borrowed or drawn down from CHA to accomplish some of these things.

RV: Both of these gentlemen are fine individuals and I have great respect for them. Every team out there has good coaches. The world of cricket is very competitive and there is no substitute for hard work and a goal-oriented approach.

We cannot have a haphazard process of selection and then throw the team together at the last minute. It is unfair on the players and the coaches. It is a miracle that we did as well as we did in some of the tournaments. Yes, with a little luck we would have qualified for the U-19 World Cup. But we need to give luck an opportunity to swing our way by assiduous preparation.

DreamCricket: You know Nabeel Ahmed, Kenvyn Williams, and Maq Qureshi have already announced their candidacy. Looks like there are others too waiting to declare their candidacy, what do you think is important for the voters as they figure out who to vote for?

RV: I am glad that there are contestants – that shows that the electorate cares. I am counting on the fact that the electorate is better informed. We are living in times where the world is rising up and demanding good governance and leadership. The time is now for the old ways to fall and new leadership and governance to take root. My resume and track record clearly set me apart from the other candidates – I will take my message to the league presidents – they know what is important and I am sure they will make a wise choice.

DreamCricket: What is your financial vision?

RV: Putting USACA on a firm financial footing will be one of my highest priorities as president. A financially stable USACA can then support a number of programs. I firmly believe that empowerment at the local level is essential for USACA. It is consistent with my philosophy to decentralize to the leagues and regions wherever possible.

USACA has two fundamental duties. First, it has to provide the framework, structure and governance for growing the sport, and fund the regions and leagues to execute at the local level. Second, it has to provide a forum for teams to play competitive cricket within the US and outside – with other nations and clubs.

I will put in place the following financial model to support this in an efficient way. USACA must set up funds for national tournaments and the duties that it has direct responsibility for. USACA must set the goal posts, provide the framework; appoint national level custodians for coaching, umpiring and the like; and spell out the standards that it expects leagues and regions to maintain. Then, USACA should get out of the way. USACA should become a medium for channeling funds to the regions and leagues to achieve the objectives. For example, USACA can specify that leagues start youth programs and women’s programs; meet the set standards for umpiring, coaching, facilities and the like – and provide funds to achieve these. Refresh grants would depend on the progress that the leagues make.

We have to get to a state where USACA is making meaningful contributions to the regions and leagues so that they can advance. My administration will accomplish all these - we will raise funds, set goals, incentives, and reward the right behavior.

DreamCricket: What is your organizational vision?

RV: Once elected, the USACA organization should understand that its job is to serve the cricket leagues in the US and not be the master. I will ensure that there is separation of administrative function from cricket management function. This is the delineation that I spoke about earlier. Among other appointments, there will be a national coach to orchestrate a national blueprint and support local activity. The president is the chief administrator not the chief selector. None of this is news for people who have been involved in professional, winning organizations. My goal would be to bring the same tried and tested models of success to cricket in the US.

As mentioned earlier, I will appoint a CEO at the earliest possible. Also, every officer on the board will have a portfolio and the ability and responsibility to execute competently and ethically. The task on hand is very large and requires more specialized skills than the board will possess. This is where volunteers can come in. We are blessed to be in a country where there is phenomenal skill and a spirit of volunteerism. I will broaden the management team by bringing on a 20 person national team of volunteer-leaders for special tasks like event organization, PR, NCAA relations, local government liaison, sponsorship generation, high school outreach, etc. We can also amplify our youth and women's cricket development with specialized help.

I will increase professionalism in cricket operations by appointing a paid national coach and converting most of the cricketing positions to be paid ones. We have for far too long counted on volunteers to go above and beyond. Volunteerism is of course very welcome; however, it cannot be a substitute for professional attention. We need a scalable option that will bring in the skill levels that we need to improve the quality of our game. So in my administration, all officials – coaches, managers, and umpires – will be compensated for their time and effort.

DreamCricket: Where do you see USACA in three years under your leadership?

RV: I see USACA as a harmonious, well-functioning organization. It will have an excellent relationship with the ICC – be a model. It will function predictably. It will be decentralized – we need to push the benefits and much of the decision making down to the leagues. The leagues are the building blocks of cricket in the US. I expect the number of leagues to have increased. USACA will have plenty of funds to carry out its normal cricketing activities – the majority of funds reaching the regions and leagues. USACA will also be working in close cooperation with the Cricket Holdings America LLC thereby giving a path for our cricket players to play professionally. I expect we would have improved cricketing conditions -- built turf wickets, have a fully functioning coaching and umpiring infrastructure and so on. I would also predict that all our cricketing teams will fare better – men, women and youth.

DreamCricket: Maq Qureshi has been spending a lot of his own money in promoting cricket - thereby filling a vast gap at the grassroots level. He has also run a successful tournament in Florida. Nabeel’s generosity over the years has also been written about on DreamCricket.com and elsewhere. You too have been donating through your organization but with longer-term goals. And all of you are running in an election. You are putting leagues in a tough situation, especially since the leagues have benefited from the generosity of all of you.

RV: Any one working to expand the cricket action is doing the game a service. It is all very welcome. There are many others who are also writing large checks but are not getting nor seeking recognition. But this election is about vision, leadership, integrity and governance. It is not about “cricket philanthropy” it is about “cricket leadership”.

DreamCricket: Your claim to fame is your network, integrity, executive management, and corporate track record. But in this economy, do you think you can raise the kind of money and build the kind of support that USACA needs?

RV: Absolutely yes. There is always business going on in every economy. A good idea and a good team will always be successful. It is all about the value that we bring. There is plenty of money available for cricket – spent by American sponsors on foreign soil. We need to sell the value of being associated with an upcoming US sport – I know how to sell concepts and value. I have raised over $100 million doing exactly that – in some instances on the basis of an idea on a PowerPoint slide. Even in the worst economic climate there is a dearth of good ideas and always a shortage of capable, committed and proven talent.

Not to forget, another source of funding for USACA is through Cricket Holdings America LLC. I will ensure that we do our part to enable success of the LLC. That will guarantee us a significant stream of revenue every year. I already serve on the LLC board – so it will be easier to work to common benefit.

DreamCricket: Nabeel Ahmed has been talking of changing the way USACA is run. How do you feel about his decision to resign and his candidacy for the election?

RV: I respect Nabeel as a gentleman and a sincere patron of cricket. But here is someone who has played two innings as VP and USACA has not improved much. If you have a seat at the table, you must do your very best to change the ways of the organization.

Escaping is not leadership – the ability to stand up and steer the organization to a righteous path is what is wanted today. I welcome Nabeel as a well wisher and patron of cricket – but not at the helm of this organization.

DreamCricket: Aren’t you late to the election? I mean, others have announced months ago and the leagues may have committed themselves to them.

RV: I saw no advantage in making a press announcement when the election itself was not announced. My own campaign is ongoing and it is progressing very well. I have already begun conversations with the league presidents. I am glad to report that they are very engaged – tough but fair. Most importantly, I am very pleased and energized with the response and support that I am getting.

I will run a professional campaign, just like I did last time around. My election website is www.USAcricketVision.com and I encourage everyone to visit. My contact information is posted there as well.

DreamCricket: Thanks for your time.

RV: You are very welcome. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to the US cricket community.

USA Cricket: Rudy Persaud strengthens stance of no confidence in USACA leadership during conference call

openingbat — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:47:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

By Peter Della Penna

Momentum continued to build on Sunday night towards bringing about drastic changes to the way cricket is being governed in the United States as Eastern American Cricket Association (NY) President Rudy Persaud continued his campaign for a no confidence motion to be brought against USACA President Gladstone Dainty. Persaud was one of many USACA stakeholders present on a nationwide teleconference call to discuss recent events in US cricket. At least 30 people identified themselves as being present while on the call, which was organized by North West Regional director Hemant Buch and moderated by North West Regional secretary Susheel Kumar.

In a letter first published on newyorkcricket.com last Tuesday, Persaud stated he had “no confidence in Mr. Dainty’s ability to lead USACA or represent my league to the ICC.” On Sunday night, he went a step further by recommending a no confidence motion should also be taken against interim USACA vice-presidents Rafey Syed and Michael Gale.

“I think as league presidents, we should just vote no confidence in the USACA president right now and the two guys who he put there as first vice-president and second vice-president,” said Persaud. “We should do something about that. We’re looking toward these league presidents to work with us and see what we can do. I don’t think USACA is going anywhere.”

Buch started off proceedings on the evening by issuing a challenge to all present to use the call to establish a clear vision for working together to bring about positive changes in US cricket. He also hoped that the call would set an example for stakeholders to get involved and be active in making decisions rather than sitting idly while waiting for things to happen.

“I’m hoping that we will help energize and galvanize all the league presidents to demand right thing for the development of cricket from the administrative members that we have elected to run business of USACA,” said Buch. “This is our opportunity to redefine the fate of US cricket. People change, situations also change. The lesson we need to learn going forward is that we need to pick individuals with proven track record and someone who will tirelessly work to unify the board. This ‘Divide and rule’ policy has gone on way too long and has prevented us from working together. I call on you today to come up with swift action before next weekend’s USACA board meeting.”

More than 10 league presidents spoke on the call, mainly from the Central East, North East and New York Regions. Lada Bedi was the only league president from the South East Region on the call while Nanda Kumar of the Houston Cricket League was the only league president on the call from the Central West. The Atlantic Region was the only region which did not have any confirmed representation of any kind on the call.

Early in the call, Kumar read out a previously prepared statement from Persaud, advocating all league presidents to rally together for positive changes.

“I would like to encourage my fellow league presidents to take a stand for the good of cricket as I am sure all of us would like to see the game grow in the USA and to be part of its growth,” read Kumar verbatim from Persaud’s statement. “However, we cannot do that by sitting on the sidelines allowing others to make a mockery of the game, our constitution and some of us. As league presidents, we have the power to decide who governs us and the right to remove those that fail to honor the commitment. The current president of USACA has failed us repeatedly, causing USACA to be suspended twice before. I’m sure you guys would not like to see us suspended again. Therefore, we have to take a stand and regain control of the management of cricket in the United States. Finally, I would like to encourage my fellow league presidents to speak up because if you don’t, you’re just as guilty as he who commits a crime against cricket and others we have elected to serve us.”

A common theme throughout the evening was the league presidents speaking out against the suspension of John Aaron, who was present on the call. Almost all league presidents who spoke during the call lamented Aaron’s suspension as being unconstitutional and hoped that it would be overturned in the near future. Many also spoke about the need for Golam Sayeed to be recognized as the Central East Representative and Tony Gilkes as the North East Representative on the USACA board of directors. The issue of the results of the Atlantic Region election was not brought up until an hour and 17 minutes into the call by Aaron after all the league presidents present had already spoken. There was also a discussion about the status of the USACA election which was scheduled for October 15 but hasn’t taken place.

Connecticut Cricket Association President Kevin Hussain urged Sayeed, Gilkes and Aaron to attend the USACA board meeting scheduled for this Saturday, October 22 in Florida. Hussain argued that by attending the meeting, the three men would be respecting the wishes of the USACA constituents who voted for them. All three men confirmed during the call that they plan on attending the board meeting in Florida.

Perhaps the most impassioned plea for the league presidents to get on the same page came from Commonwealth Cricket League (NY) President Lesly Lowe. During his remarks, Lowe stated that USACA had been in decline for decades. Lowe blamed the current state of USACA on the league presidents, but said he believed the same league presidents hold the power to make changes and turn things around.

“I’ve been involved in cricket for a long time,” said Lowe. “I was 14 years old when I started playing cricket in America. The Commonwealth Cricket League started out in 1980. USACA has always been a closed door society. USACA has always been a good old boys club. USACA has never had any transparency. USACA has had zero credibility, I mean zero credibility. Over the years, USACA has not gotten any better. It has gotten worse. In the early ‘70s we had a president of USACA. The president’s name was Nazir Khan. Nazir was based in Philadelphia. Nazir Khan was elected by four people. This organization was so opaque, you couldn’t see through it. This was worse than a smoke filled room.”

“Now, this is 2011. We are living in the most democratic society, America. USACA is our national body and today if you look what’s happening in USACA, we see if you look back at the past it has gotten worse and worse and worse. Now, we are to blame. I’ll tell you who is to blame and if we do not fix this, we are going to carry this blame for a long time. This can be fixed tomorrow. This can be fixed by the league presidents. We are the guys fighting the battle. We are the guys in the trenches. We are the guys with the long boats, doing the hard work. Why should we sit back and let whatever is going on take place right now in USACA?”

“So if we want to make things better, what we’re doing here tonight is the start hopefully of something good and the league presidents must take responsibility, 100% of responsibility because we need to do what’s best for US cricket. Right now, I would say we are maybe the laughing stock of the rest of the world and if you guys disagree with me it’s up to you but I don’t think you should disagree because countries have come from behind like Bangladesh, who once we were ahead of Bangladesh in many ways. Today, Bangladesh is playing Test cricket.”

Bedi used his time to state that he is in favor of the compliance process. A recent poll showed that USACA fans and stakeholders are divided on the issue of whether or not voting eligibility should be tied to satisfactory completion of the compliance review process.

“Regarding compliance, I am definitely in favor of this compliance because every time we have elections and after the elections we’ve heard that there is a lot of bogus leagues or bogus votes and we always complain for the next three years. So this is the best, the compliance to find which is legal, who can vote,” said Bedi, before joining the chorus calling for Aaron’s reinstatement.

Southern Connecticut Cricket Association President and North East Regional director Leighton Greenidge announced a proposal for all league presidents to further discuss these issues in a face-to-face meeting next month.

“Arrangements have been made to have a face-to-face meeting for every single league president that is interested in having a face-to-face meeting,” said Greenidge.” Arrangements have been made to pay for all of your expenses, including travel and hotel, to convene a meeting in the New York-New Jersey area.” Greenidge did not identify how the expenses would be covered.

Before signing off, Buch and Kumar stated that there may be a follow-up meeting this week to solidify plans to present the concerns of stakeholders and constituents to the USACA board during this weekend’s board meeting in Florida. According to Buch, the amount of league presidents on Sunday night’s conference call outnumbered those in attendance at the last USACA Annual General Meeting in Dallas in April of 2010.

USA Cricket: Poll shows stakeholders want Aaron reinstated but are divided on compliance review

openingbat — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 04:42:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

By Peter Della Penna

The results of an independent survey to gather opinions on recent events in US cricket demonstrate an overwhelming number of respondents (90.8%) are in favor of the immediate reinstatement of USACA Secretary John Aaron. The survey also revealed a near unanimous call (96.7%) for USACA to recognize Golam Sayeed as the Central East Region’s representative on the USACA board and for USACA to publish the results of the Atlantic Region election which took place in July.

However, respondents were split virtually straight down the middle on the issue of the compliance review. Just over half (50.8%) of those who responded to a question asking, “Should voting eligibility for USACA’s forthcoming election depend on completion of review process?” responded with a yes, saying that only those leagues that have satisfactorily completed all aspects of the compliance process should be allowed to vote.

The survey also asked respondents to identify if they were an administrator of a member league. Among those in the survey pool who acknowledged being a league administrator, just 14% said they were in favor of voting eligibility dependent upon completion of the compliance review.

Image (right) - Stakeholders want USACA Secretary John Aaron (pictured at the 2011 USACA Women's Tournament) reinstated after a controversial suspension by Gladstone Dainty last month. [Courtesy: Peter Della Penna/DreamCricket]

On the question of whether or not survey takers felt that the ICC should step in to sort out USACA’s problems, 75% said they are in favor of the ICC getting involved rather than USACA resolving things internally. Among those who acknowledged being a league administrator, only 28.5% said they felt that USACA should resolve its own issues internally and respect the wishes of those chosen to represent the leagues rather than let the ICC get involved.

Survey results to essential questions below.

1. USACA President Gladstone Dainty recently announced that "after consultation with many of the USACA board members," he was suspending USACA’s Secretary John Aaron "immediately and indefinitely." How familiar are you with the circumstances surrounding the issue?

53.2% Very familiar
28.6% Somewhat familiar
18.3% Not familiar

2. Do you believe President Dainty has the constitutional authority to suspend a board member without approval from a majority of the board members?

2.4% Yes. Mr. Dainty can do what he wants.
85.7% No. Only the USACA board can suspend a member.
11.9% Other.

3. Do you want the USACA board to overturn Mr. Dainty's decision to suspend Mr. Aaron and reinvite Mr. Aaron back to the USACA board?

90.8% Yes, the USACA board should invite Mr. Aaron back immediately.
4.2% No, Mr. Dainty was right in suspending Mr. Aaron and the USACA board should approve the decision of Mr. Dainty.
5.0% USACA board should invite Mr. Aaron back but on certain conditions.

4. USACA recently hired an independent auditor to run a compliance review process for all member leagues. Should voting eligibility for USACA's forthcoming election depend on completion of review process?

50.8% Yes. Only those leagues that have satisfactorily completed all aspects of the compliance process should be allowed to vote.
49.2% No. The compliance process should be independent of the election process.

5. Do you feel that ICC should get involved in USACA matters or should USACA resolve its own issues internally?

25.0% USACA should resolve its own issues internally and respect the wishes of those chosen to represent the leagues.
75% I do not believe that USACA can resolve all of its internal issues. The ICC should get involved.

6. USACA recently conducted regional elections in Central East and Atlantic Region. However, USACA has not yet recognized Mr. Golam Sayeed who was elected the Regional Representative of Central East. Also, USACA President blocked the announcement of results in Atlantic Region after the election was completed and the votes were tallied. How do you feel about these decisions?

96.7% USACA should immediately recognize Mr. Golam Sayeed as the Central East Representative AND USACA should publish the results of the Atlantic Region election.
3.3% Mr. Dainty was right in blocking Atlantic Region’s results. Also, USACA is right in not recognizing Mr. Golam Sayeed as Central East’s representative.

NYR Chairman Lester Hooper writes letter to league presidents urging them to 'unite for one common goal'

openingbat — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:13:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

The following is a letter titled, "Time for us to unite for one common goal" addressed to USACA league presidents and administrators. It was written by New York Regional Chairman Lester Hooper at 1:16 p.m. on Tuesday, October 11 and obtained from a source.

Regional Directors And League Presidents,

Let me be clear about this. Gladstone Dainty will always be Gladstone Dainty. As much as it is always healthy to express your views via emails, articles, etc., none of said actions will change the thought process and actions of Gladstone Dainty. We can all sit here and throw the blame at his door step but after awhile we as cricket administrators and stakeholders will eventually have to take the blame for allowing this circus to go on. We are all so caught up with how many players from our respective region make the US team or whether or not the coach and manager is from our region than we neglect the most important thing that makes it all worthwhile, cricket. Folks I like many of you came from a background where the game of cricket took precedence. The thick politics, nepotism and favoritism had no place.

As of a few weeks ago, the USA women's team was preparing to enter their final camp before going off to Bangladesh. As of this morning, the coach Linden Fraser was removed and replaced by the expensive Mumbai coach Robin Singh and the team manger is in the process of making calls to members of the team informing them that they are being replaced in the US squad. Why? Because coach Fraser inquired about the $100,000.00 that was given to USACA to prepare the ladies for Bangladesh and the ladies voiced their 1st amendment right in objecting to the stipend they were offered to tour Bangladesh, respectively. It really saddens me that USACA does not have money to prepare our national team and run our national tournaments but have the necessary funds to pay a coach a minimum of $10,000 for a week or two. Once again I ask the question, when the tour is over what happens to the women? Folks this is the second time for the year that USACA is paying a coach thousands of dollars just to chaperone a US squad without any help to their long term development. No disrespect to coach Robin Singh whom I respect greatly but as a professional I'm sure he knows that there is only so much you can do coming in a day or two before a tournament and not knowing the players. The same case can be made for our U19 who just came back from Ireland recently. Will Robin be doing any work with them in the near future? Will Robin be instructing our local coaches? Will he be conducting open sessions in the various regions? The only time I hear the name Robin Singh is just before a US team goes on tour. Folks this is unacceptable. Let's pay Robin his worth but let him earn that money by aiding in the development of US cricket.

On the other hand, the ladies in training to represent the USA in Bangladesh are now being informed that they are being replaced by a second string team. We as regional directors and league presidents need to stand up and say enough is enough. My guess is that some of you regional directors will allow players from your region to participate in this second string team which will once again facilitate the actions of President Dainty. Why? So that you can stand up and say several players from my region made the US team. What you fail to realize is that the ICC is currently monitoring the situation and they are asking the same question that many of us are asking. Why are the league presidents allowing this to happen? They are the ones who have all the power. Yet, they sit idly by as President Dainty continues to drive USACA towards another suspension. Who are we going to blame this time? Dainty? No, all of us will be held equally accountable this time around. The person that witnesses a rape and fails to report it is just as guilty as the perpetrator. Yet, you will all sit by as the second string USA team is made to be the biggest joke at the World Cup Qualifiers. I urge the regional directors and league presidents not to facilitate the actions of President Dainty. Send a message to him that we will all hold one front in the defence of cricket in the USA and the USACA organization . If not, I promise you that individuals outside of the US will make the decision for you.

Those of you in alliance with President Dainty, I can only wish that you would do your duties in the interest of USACA and the many cricketers, administrators and stakeholders who are currently doing their part to help USACA reach better and greater heights. We cannot continue to have a dysfunctional board and expect to be taken seriously by the cricket community. Many within the US have voiced their opinions on President Dainty's unconstitutional actions over the past few months. Yet, you in alliance have remained quiet. Do you agree with his actions or are you afraid to voice your true opinion? I personally do not have an axe to grind with the President but folks once again, enough is enough.

I am not one to get involve in USACA politics but folks how do you sit by as the game that you love is being destroyed on a national level and by extension a regional level. This is not about John Aaron or Linden Fraser, the several women from New York who are currently being treated unfairly or any particular region. Today its these folks tomorrow its someone from your region. We need to be more united than in the past. Cricket in this country can grow into something we can all be proud of; however, if we continue to go down this path, we can all share the same disastrous fate. Folks lets wake up and do the right thing. President Dainty's unilateral decisions will eventually cost us a price that we cannot afford. Whether it is another suspension or someone like the Don Lockerbie winning a multi million law suit against USACA. Folks, call an emergency meeting and lets get USACA back on track.

Regards,

Lester Hooper

Director NYCR

NYR Chairman Lester Hooper writes open letter to Dainty regarding Aaron suspension

openingbat — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:50:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

The following is an open letter to USACA President Gladstone Dainty written by New York Regional Chairman Lester Hooper at 10:05 a.m. on Tuesday, October 11.

Dear President Dainty,

Let me first start out by stating that this letter is long overdue. Mr. President it gives me no pleasure in writing this letter in response to your email you sent out a few weeks ago, RE: SUSPENSION OF USACA SECRETARY MR. JOHN AARON. It is with this displeasure and disappointment that I strongly voice my objection to said suspension.

You recently attended a meeting in New York where the objective was for you to shed some light on the current state of USACA. Said meeting was attended by the NYCR league presidents and several stakeholders. This meeting was by no means set up to attack you or insult you but to basically give you the opportunity to tell us the truth about that state of USACA. Unfortunately, after that meeting many of us came away with more questions than answers. Based on information coming out of that meeting, Mr. John Aaron wrote an extremely accurate article which highlighted the high and low points of the meeting. Given the fact that two (2) of USACA board members were also in attendance in Mr. Krish Prasad (NYCR Representative to USACA) and Mr. John Aaron (Secretary of USACA), several valid questions were raised by same. At no time were those questions deemed damaging to USACA or any of its board members. The questions put forth were questions that everyone in that room and the entire country were searching to find an answer to. It is for those questions asked and Mr. Aaron’s article that you stated in your letter that Mr. Aaron made statements damaging to USACA. Mr. President, I hate to be the one to point out the obvious but USACA is currently damaged and has been for quite sometime.

Suspending Mr. Aaron at such a critical time instead of addressing the questions raised by him can only be seen as retaliation for raising those questions and shedding light on important issues in accordance with his duties as Secretary of USACA. Mr. Aaron answered all the questions put forth by those in attendance without addressing USACA‘s sensitive and top secret issues; something that was expected of you Mr. President. Since his suspension, Mr. Aaron has remained optimistic that USACA will get back on track and has publicly stated that with the help of the board members, he intends to do whatever is needed to get USACA back on the right tract.

Mr. President I am not a politician. What I am is a cricket lover since the age of five. I am still naive to believe that cricket lovers like myself in the USA are able to set aside politics, favoritism, nepotism and all the other elements that have no place in cricket. In order for us to move forward, you as our current president need to acknowledge when his actions are incorrect, as in this case. It is my sincere hope that you would see fit to reverse your decision, which to the best of my knowledge was made without the input from the full USACA board, and immediately lift the suspension on Mr. John Aaron.

Best Regards,
Lester Hooper
Director NYCR

Reform and processes need to be put in place - John Aaron interview

openingbat — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:34:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

In a far-reaching and candid interview, John Aaron, Executive Secretary of USA Cricket Association, speaks to Venu Palaparthi about the issues facing USA cricket today.

In Part 1 of the two-part interview, we hear his thoughts on the leadership crisis at USACA, favoritism or quid pro quo decisions, the importance of the commercial deal and the complete lack of communications.

Thanks for taking time from your busy schedule to share your thoughts on USA cricket. Let's begin on a positive note. What are some of the things that you are proud of during the last three years that you were Executive Secretary?

First, thanks for asking me. I appreciate the opportunity. There are many positive things happening with USA cricket today. I am particularly proud that the women’s program has generated such a significant buzz during the past two years, including attracting the attention of a very generous benefactor. The USA women did well to defeat Canada 3-0 last year to move on to the Women’s Cricket World Cup Qualifier in Bangladesh this November. I am also proud of our Under-15 lads winning the ICC Americas North championship last month in Winnipeg, Canada.

Another decision of the board that everyone can be proud of, would be the signing of an agreement creating Cricket Holdings America, LLC. The appointment of USA Cricket’s first CEO and the level of candidates the search attracted was, at the time, a significant accomplishment.

Since things are so heated up, let's now move straight to the issues facing USACA. Every cricket board in the world is beset with problems and low-intensity feuding but for most members and associates, that has not hampered overall progress. On balance, have things improved over the last several years for USACA? Or are the problems so widespread and so malignant that we cannot get the house in order?

As a national organization with the only “product” being cricket, one would imagine that finding common ground within USACA would be rather easy. That appears very elusive and has manifested itself in such a divisive manner. This has begun to erode whatever confidence cricket stakeholders had begun to find in their national organization.

I only came on board as USACA’s Executive Secretary in March 2008, so I was not totally privy to the inner politicking of the organization prior to that. However, I was naïve enough to think that whatever ailed USACA before 2008 would soon disappear. I was also naïve to believe that a new energetic board could and would address the issues that caused USACA to be suspended twice before, and to come up with workable solutions to help build the organization and the confidence of its stakeholders. However, as time progressed, I noticed it was not the energy level of the new faces on the board, but the malignant nature of its leadership that was strangling the organization.

The problems that faced USACA before the current administration appear to be similar to some of the problems facing the organization at this moment, lack of adequate funding, distrust among board members and a leadership generously described by many as dictatorial.

It is my belief that many of the problems under those three categories can be addressed through scheduled meetings of the board. The USACA board appears to get much more accomplished when it meets, rather than not. However, therein lies the problem – a president who wields more power between meetings, therefore is in no hurry to preside over meetings and democratic processes.

Since you have been an integral part of this administration for over three years, our readers might be wondering why you did not speak up sooner.

The entire USACA board of directors has been the recipient of some very unflattering public comments from cricket stakeholders. But I have been one of a handful of the members on the board who have been fighting day in and day out, to get USACA on the track of true transparency and good governance during the past three years, six months, however I can understand and appreciate the frustration and disgust of the average cricketer and fan in the USA, and directed at the whole bunch of us.

For some years now, I have kept a public silence, which in hindsight may not have done USA cricket any good. On the other hand, I was sincerely hoping that by seeking to project a positive image vis-à-vis USA cricket, the Gods of good will would have blessed us with a turn-around in governance. As a result, I along with all those elected to serve must bear the burden of responsibility for any lack of governance of the organization.

However, the cricketing public ought to know how difficult it has been to serve on a board that is void of real and dynamic leadership in the person of Gladstone Dainty, and a Constitution that badly needs revisiting.

We have heard recently of some strong opposition emanating from Ahmed Jeddy, Tony Gilkes, Krish Prasad and yourself. What specific issues brought you together?

With as diverse a group as the USACA board is, it is not always that members see eye-to-eye on issues. The absence of process and protocol demonstrated by President Dainty was the basis for the coalition. The coalition has since expanded beyond the four gentlemen that you mention. But certainly, the four of us came together at a crucial juncture and because of the way in which certain appointments were handled.

What specifically got you aggravated?

It was the issue surrounding the appointment of members to the Cricket Holdings America, LLC board and the appointment of two interim vice-presidents to the USACA board.

It was clear that three members of the board Shelton Glasgow, Nasir Javed and Masood Aktar Syed were lined up behind President Dainty in the appointment of the individuals currently identified as filling those slots. [Editor's note: Gladstone Dainty, John Thickett, Ram Varadarajan and Dr. Asif Ahmed were appointed USACA representatives to the CHA, LLC board. Michael Gale and Rafey Syed were appointed to replace Nabeel Ahmed and Manaf Mohamed as USACA VPs.]

Treasurer John Thickett, considered one of the architects of the LLC agreement and in agreement with those identified to fill the positions of the individuals, was expected to support the appointments. However, Krish Prasad, Tony Gilkes, Ahmed Jeddy and myself saw that the appointments were being pushed through without the due consideration of other equally, if not more qualified individuals identified for the same positions.

So the issue that galvanized the opposition was how these appointments were made...

We felt that the process and protocol dictated that board members be afforded the opportunity of reviewing the CVs of all persons nominated with a debate before taking a vote. That was not done, and we expressed our disappointment to President Dainty and Treasurer Thickett.

Those sentiments were further expressed in a teleconference attended by Dainty, Thickett, Prasad, Gilkes, Jeddy and myself. At that teleconference President Dainty and Treasurer Thickett were presented with a list of protocols, which I believe was based on sound principles of good governance.

However, it quickly became apparent that no consideration would be given by President Dainty to the suggestions regarding the appointments to the CHA, LLC board, and as recommended by Prasad, Gilkes, Jeddy and Aaron. One would have imagined that the leader of an organization would at least have given serious consideration to, or encouraged a board discussion on some of the recommendations of fifty-percent of his board, at that time.

That brings us back to why you did not go public with your grievance then?

Well, the first thing I did after President Dainty refused to acknowledge that fifty-percent of the board was not in agreement with the process he was seeking to employ, was to write the ICC advising them that USACA was not being governed in an honest and fair manner, and encouraging them to review the matter on behalf of the thousands of cricketers and cricket fans in the USA. The informal response from the ICC suggested that the international organization was not interested in stepping in with regard to good governance of a sovereign organization. Although disappointing, the response was not unexpected.

With more than half of the current USACA board objecting to the manner in which USACA is being run, it is very surprising that the ICC is reluctant to become involved. One can only speculate that the ICC’s reluctance may be rooted in the potential for the growth of the game in the USA through the recently signed LLC deal, and as such is less concerned with the governance of USACA at this time.

The reason behind writing to the ICC was not to seek the suspension of USACA, but to encourage some form of review and/or response from the international body.

In any board, change is usually effected internally and rarely through the involvement of external forces...

Yes I agree that rebuilding process had to start with good governance, transparency and a set of protocols and guidelines aimed at establishing mutual respect between the organization and its members. That has not been the case with USACA.

If the style was more inclusive, since Gladstone Dainty had a clear majority until last November, he would have heard everyone’s views and still done the exact same thing? The President had the support of Glasgow, Masood and Nasir. After Nabeel Ahmed resigned, any chance of [the opposition] gathering enough votes vanished [in the near-term].

In many ways it was unfortunate that 1st VP Nabeel Ahmed chose to resign from the board at the time he did. Yes, his resignation did impact the possible outcomes of some issues, but one cannot blame Ahmed for quitting, after all he had been there and experienced a similar style of leadership under Gladstone Dainty, prior to the current term of this board.

Gladstone Dainty knew that all he needed was four votes from a depleted board and he would cast the deciding vote in favor of any agenda he wanted. It did not matter to him that he was forced to cast a deciding vote on both the issue of the LLC appointments and the replacement of two VPs to the USACA board.

It did not matter to him that fifty-percent of his board did not agree with the process employed in the appointments of the LLC board members. More alarming and damaging however, was the appointments of the two interim vice-presidents to the USACA board, via a teleconference. Again, the votes may very well have been there to appoint the two gentlemen to the board; however, the president ignored the nominations of two other outstanding candidates. His urgency to appoint the two interim VPs is indicative of his haste to govern based on his own agenda and not that of the board.

There was no reason why the incoming Regional Representatives of the North West and South West Regions should not have participated in the decision-making process of appointing the two vice presidents to the USACA board, or the four appointments to the LLC board.

USACA's decisions should at least be consistent with the wishes of USA's leagues. So I can appreciate your concern that a good number of board's views were ignored. But where the rubber hits the road, you know USACA's tournaments have remained haphazard, the selection process remained sub-par, and we haven’t seen a robust training calendar, scheduling and planning have remained somewhat spotty. Much of it without any public protest from dissenting board members.

There have been ample protests made inside and outside of the organization; however those protests have fallen on deaf ears and a leadership that is malignant in its approach to govern from the top down.

In many ways USACA has grappled with restoring an image in a public relations milieu that plagued the organization prior to elections in March 2008. Any attempt to appear divided in public was cautioned as counter-productive, thus thwarting any effective protest from members of the board. It appears in hindsight now that it did not matter how many chances were allowed President Dainty to change; the situation was never going to change, because the modus operandi served those proponents well in achieving their agendas at the detriment of good governance and real leadership.

Everywhere you go, cricketers talk of rampant corruption. Do you actually believe in stories of corruption?

There is no rampant corruption, and to the best of my knowledge there is no corruption with regard to USACA’s finances. Treasurer Thickett has been very thorough in his reporting and documenting of USACA’s finances up until recently, probably due to a lack of in-person meetings of the board. However, I feel that members of the board are entitled to, at least a quarterly financial report, regardless whether USACA holds a meeting or not. For instance, I have seen Ahmed Jeddy, a board member, ask Treasurer Thickett for financial information, and to the best of my knowledge, the request has been ignored.

The lack of transparency and due process results in some very negative speculation. I will give you an example. President Dainty asked Treasurer Thickett to stop the organization’s bank from mailing USACA’s bank statement to me, in my capacity as Executive Secretary. It begs the question, why the need to hide the in-flow and out-flow of the organization’s finances from the Executive Secretary? That move is certainly one that concerns a number of the board members and I. It was very surprising to me that Treasurer Thickett agreed with the president’s unilateral decision aimed at preventing me from seeing USACA’s finances.

Many of the issues involving perceived corruption unfortunately have to do with quid pro quo circumstances, done for political expediency.

Are you referring to perceptions regarding favoritism? A large number of decisions are perceived to be made on political grounds. The selection of board members, the selection of certain players, the selection of delegates and support staff, the selectors themselves and, more recently, the selection of the actual playing XI - the criticism is that USACA is largely about ‘who you know’ than ‘merit.’ Everyone complains about a lack of process until they are themselves a beneficiary.

Let me answer that by first saying, not everyone will ever be totally satisfied with any team selected, unless all of their “wishes” are met. So some of the criticism itself is of a questionable quality, however, the overall governance of USACA certainly contributes to such negative speculation.

I would like to think that players are selected on merit however; I am not that naive to believe that politics, favoritism and other dynamics don’t play a role in the selection process. That’s why reform and processes need to be put in place, to serve as guidelines and markers for good governance. That way, it would be harder to select a player who does not merit selection.

I agree that these perceived ‘political favors’; these things impact the very foundation of performance and development. So what have you done to put an end to this?

Personally, I have done everything I possibly can to stand against such occurrences, but it’s hard when you are standing alongside the minority on such issues. I continue to believe that you cannot change a system, if you are on the outside looking in. So although dissociating one’s self from an entity by resigning may be perceived as the right protest, it can also be perceived as running away from the heat or accepting defeat.

Coming to communication with USACA’s constituents, an area that you are responsible for, are you happy with how this important aspect is being handled? In May, the President admitted that in the past USACA had not been able to communicate well. In his own words: “Now we want to give everyone a chance to have their say.” The president has suddenly realized the truth after so many years at the helm?

The President may very well be pandering to the stakeholders; however, he must first ask himself, why all of a sudden he realizes this, when he has been running USACA for more than six years. One may consider such a statement as being insulting. What was he doing about the poor communication over the years and preceding the current administration?

But how about the communications that you are in charge of? Let us start with the website? Aren't you responsible for this? The website has been down for over two weeks now!

First on the issue of communication, I recall that soon after being elected Secretary and noticing the efforts of the energetic newcomers to the board being stymied by President Dainty, I issued a communiqué to the USACA membership titled “What’s happening!” President Dainty was not very happy with that, but I felt it was necessary to inform the general membership of what was happening inside USACA.

Over the past three years I have issued almost forty media releases, something unheard of from USACA in the past. I sought to cultivate a relationship with the domestic and international media, because I wanted to rebuild the public relations image of USACA and kill the perception that USACA was some sort of secret society.

Pic (Right): John Aaron receives a plaque at the ICC Americas U-15 tournament in 2009

With regard to the web site, credit for improvement in the aesthetic value of the USACA web site should go to former Regional Director Raj Padhi who redesigned the site with a cleaner and uncluttered look. My role was limited to moderation and I sought to focus on cricket and not politics or any other biases. For the last nine months, I have been the sole moderator of articles posted to the website, but let me be clear, I don’t have the necessary administrative passwords to change the layout of the web site or to add any dynamic changes to its appearance.

President Dainty received those passwords from Mr. Padhi, soon after the latter demitted office in 2010. President Dainty has since refused to share those passwords with me. He recently stated that interim 2nd vice president Rafey Syed is restructuring the site and adding some safeguards, so I have to assume he shared them with Mr. Syed. I am aware that the site is currently down and I have asked both Mr. Dainty and Mr. Syed about it. Mr. Dainty has not responded and Mr. Syed appears incapable of managing the site in a professional manner. It is a disgrace to the organization and an embarrassment to the USA cricketing community.

Hopefully, funds will be made available soon to engage a professional web builder to change the look of the site to a more engaging, dynamic and user-friendly one.

While the financial information is somewhat current on USACA’s web site, the minutes of meetings weren’t current before the website completely went offline. There is a note that said, ‘MPA’ and no minutes were available. As secretary, you were responsible for keeping minutes and publishing them.

Let me start off by explaining what MPA means. It means “Minutes Pending Approval.” The Minutes as posted to the website were current under the Constitution, which clearly states a Summary of the Minutes must be posted to the web site after approval.

Following an in-person meeting, a draft of the Minutes is circulated to members of the board for review. Some members of the board opt to respond to the draft with suggested changes, queries or amendments, while others await such an agenda item at the next in-person meeting. A set of Minutes is then prepared for presentation at the next in-person meeting of the board of directors.

Following the adoption of the Minutes, a Summary of same is prepared and posted to the organization’s web site. However, posting of the Minutes of an in-person meeting of the board is dependent upon approval at an in-person meeting. Such meetings have been far and few in between, resulting in the prolonged posting of the Summary to the web site.

A perfect example would be the Minutes of the last in-person meeting held in November 2010, a Summary of those Minutes cannot be posted to the web site, until said Minutes have been adopted at the next in-person meeting of the board and a Summary of same is prepared, following that meeting.

It is a very convoluted process and is largely dependent upon the response time of members of the board and the scheduling of in-person board meetings. It is something that needs to be addressed when the Constitution is next reviewed and amended.

How come there haven't been any meetings since April and in-person meetings since November 2010. In your view, does the board meet often enough to run an organization as complex as USACA?

The board does not meet as often as it should to efficiently serve a membership as large and as diverse as USACA. The Constitution suggests an in-person meeting every two months, or at the discretion of the President. As a 501(c) 3 organization and in keeping with the Constitution, I believe we should meet in a different region once every two months and hold a teleconference in-between those meetings to cover some administrative issues. Earlier last year the board agreed upon a set of six in-person meetings over the following year, but President Dainty has either called off meetings in some very interesting ways, or postponed scheduled meetings, much to the consternation and expense of board members.

Did the important decisions of the last two years - the Pearls Cup, the Don Lockerbie matter, the commercial deal, changes of tournament hosts from one region to another, the election of the two new VPs, the appointment of Manaf as the GM, distribution of dividends - were these made at meetings of the board?

Some of the issues mentioned were either discussed in whole or in part during in-person meetings or during teleconferences, while others were dealt with exclusively by the president. Not all of the decisions were made by the board, in compliance with commonly accepted parliamentary procedures, or using Robert’s Rules of Order.

With regard to the apparent propensity of USACA to make decisions without as much as a discussion, what specifically can be done to improve this situation - do we need constitutional safeguards to prevent this ‘our way or the highway’ mentality?

My view is that the board should meet often in order to address issues, even if it’s simply to brainstorm solutions emanating from thirteen minds rather than just one or two. I am advocating one in-person board meeting be held every two months and rotated from region to region, with the meetings open to league presidents of the host region, except where sensitive issues need to be addressed solely by the board. Such a schedule would build confidence in the organization, while demonstrating transparency and eliciting the support of each region in an engaging and positive manner.

Yes, I am sure that Constitutional safeguards can be put in place to avoid the ‘my way or the highway’ syndrome affecting USACA’s leadership, but more importantly a democratically moral compass would be as effective. Many of the decisions made and affecting the governance, administration and effectiveness of USACA are made outside the realm of the board and not by a majority of any kind. Such decisions are often made between in-person board meetings, and are camouflaged as being necessary before the next in-person board meeting. For example, many of the personnel appointments for tournaments are often unilaterally made by the president outside of board approval, causing much speculation on quid pro quo arrangements, or cronyism.

Until such time as USACA entrusts a full-time CEO with the day-to-day management operations of the organization, the board should continue to be responsible for the implementation of policy and administrative functions that directly affect the membership, or where benefits are seen as affecting one region more so than another. Some of the day-to-day administrative functions should be the responsibility of an empowered General Manager, and not micro-managed by the President.

Do you support the commercial deal with Top Bloom/Podar and NZC? What was your role in the commercial deal?

Yes, I do wholeheartedly support the commercial deal with Top Bloom/Podar and NZC. It is a rather comprehensive deal that’s a winner for all involved. My role was minimal, in that the seats at the negotiating table were limited to President Dainty and Treasurer John Thickett.

One thing that has concerned me about this deal - while the money being talked about can only be good. What you have here is the complete reliance on a big-bang approach –like the 2010 Pearls Cup, chasing millions from a commercial deal. Meanwhile, three years have gone by with just talk of a big deal. Why this over-reliance on a big commercial deal? Most sponsors see USACA as a black hole when it comes to having meaningful discussions surrounding sponsorships.

Sponsorship can be both easy and extremely hard to obtain, depending upon how one approaches a potential sponsor and what one brings to the table in exchange for such sponsorship.

USACA brought a lot of negative baggage to the table through poor leadership and therefore could not ask for much in return, therefore the big-bang theory had to be put into play, at considerable risk, but it was a risk USACA was forced to take in the absence of any other options.

We were left with no other option but to sell the rights to cricket in this country – a sports oriented Mecca, to entities with deep enough pockets of cash and influence to ride out the “capital expenditure years” of the initiatives.

On the other hand I am not surprised that potential sponsors saw USACA as a black hole when it came to having meaningful discussions surrounding sponsorships, because USACA was fighting its own internal demons, while trying to present a public façade of unification. Sponsors doing proper due diligence did not have to dig too deeply to see the chasm that was USACA.

Coming back to USACA’s reps to the CHA board, you indicated that you and some others had concerns about specific appointees. Can you shed some light on that?

As I said, we disagreed with the manner in which the process was conducted and I thought USACA owed it to itself to select from a wider pool of candidates. Philosophically, I don’t have a problem with the President of USACA and/or the Treasurer serving on the LLC board, however I disagreed with the manner in which the appointments were made.

I could conceivably have supported some of the choices in a democratically convened procedure, where other candidates were also considered.

I, like several other USACA board members feel that the sitting President of USACA should automatically sit on the LLC board as the principal representative of USACA and that position should be vacated when a new USACA President is elected.

Can you not recall them? Or is this a fixed-term process?

The members will serve a two-year term. Yes, any of the candidates may be recalled by a majority of the USACA board, but that is something that should not be considered out of malice, but based on sound reasoning or to protect the interests of USACA.

As secretary, do you think you did everything you could? What could you have done better? What were you unable to do because your hands were tied?

I would never be satisfied in what I have done for cricket in the past three years. If one aims for excellence, there is always more that can and should be done. In retrospect, I could have yelled louder or sought public support earlier for what I thought were just causes, rather than be naive to think that we would ultimately turn the corner of good governance, and under Gladstone Dainty’s leadership.

[In part 2 of the interview, which will be published tomorrow, John Aaron talks about the compliance process and the USACA election.]

Just after we published the first part of this two-part interview, in a very unfortunate turn of events, John Aaron was suspended by Gladstone Dainty for "comments damaging to the good standing and well-being of USACA." After considering the impact of the latest development, DreamCricket.com decided to proceed with publishing Part 2 of the interview.

In Part 2 of the two-part interview, we hear Mr. Aaron's thoughts on the constitutional amendments, the compliance process and the forthcoming election. Click here if you haven't read Part 1.

Comments [Login needed to post comments]

Can you walk us through the circumstances of Manaf Mohamed's appointment as General Manager? Why was there no search conducted for CEO?

Manaf was originally identified to become the Cricket Manager - a paid position within USACA, having served in a voluntary capacity as Cricket Operations Director, and before the departure of CEO Don Lockerbie. Following Lockerbie and USACA parting ways in November 2010, Manaf Mohamed was appointed Cricket Manager, as part of an ICC compliance agreement to have a minimum of two paid employees of USACA.

Many members of the board have urged President Dainty to commence the search for a new CEO, but he has been reluctant to do so, basing his argument on the lack of adequate funding to afford a CEO at the time. The position of CEO is a budgeted position within USACA and is expected to be funded through the CHA, LLC commercial deal.

What about the U19 national tournament and women's team preparation for forthcoming ICC tournaments? What is being done there?

The regions have been diligently preparing their Under-19 teams for the National Tournament, for which the host region and the dates were announced sometime back, and a budget submitted by USACA’s Cricket Manager. It appears as though the necessary funding was not there to conduct the tournament and answers regarding same are hard to come by.

The senior men’s team is now in limbo with no apparent program of activity in place due to a lack of funding. USACA is expected to host the ICC World Cricket League Division 4 tournament in early 2012.

The USACA women’s squad has been preparing for the Women’s Cricket World Cup Qualifier this November in Bangladesh, and their preparation is also now being threatened, presumably as a result of a lack of funds, despite USACA receiving a generous six-figure donation specific for the squad’s preparation for Bangladesh. Hopefully, their preparation will get back on track soon.

Why does funding for national tournaments and for preparation continue to be an issue? Hasn't USACA received funds from the commercial deal?

We all heard during a New York Region town-hall meeting this summer that USACA had received north of $1 Million at that time. I think your question should be addressed to Treasurer Thickett. He might have more recent information, as board members have not received any recent financial information. It is hard to agree or disagree with the financial excuses being given.

You mentioned the need for constitutional reform when talking about board meetings. Returning to that topic, three years is a long time and I find it hard to believe that as custodians of cricket, the board, and that includes all of you, did not make a single change or amendment. The members were promised some amendments at last year’s AGM but nothing appears to have come of that?

There appears to be no urgency on the part of the President to seek constitutional reforms but we all must bear the burden of culpability. A Constitution Review committee was established by the board with Shelton Glasgow as its Chair, and Mr. Glasgow did submit interim reports to the board. A brief bullet point suggested list of amendments was presented by Mr. Glasgow to the board shortly before the 2010 AGM; however there has not been any discussion of these suggested amendments.

As the policy arm of the organization, we the members of the board should have insisted on the Constitution being addressed, however, in the absence of meetings, a lot of the priority issues are often not addressed in a comprehensive manner – the Constitution falling victim, ever so often.

What specific areas of the constitution should have been addressed, in your view?

I believe one of the tenets of the Constitution in need of change is the inability of a majority of the board to summon a meeting without the blessing of the President. Meetings of USACA should be held once every two months in a different region and be open to the league presidents of that region, except in the case of sensitive discussions involving confidentiality agreements, etc. Some of the other areas of the Constitution in need of review and amendments are - term limits, clarity in membership qualifications for USACA, recognition of a national umpiring body, and giving the board a broader mandate in governance.

What needs to be done for the wheels to be set in motion on these types of amendments?

First, as I have said, the Constitution should be reviewed by a review committee. In my view, the committee's membership should not contain more than 25% of its membership from the USACA board. There are several gifted and learned individuals outside of the board who are well-versed in sports constitution and the law, who can be very objective in their approach to recommending the necessary changes to the document.

Of course, it’s the league presidents who will be asked to adopt any amendments to the Constitution. I do believe if the committee recommends changes that will improve the organization and help the sport grow in the USA, the league presidents will support such amendments.

North West and South West had their elections earlier in the year and the Central East too just named Golam Sayeed as their Regional Representative to the USACA Board. How does that change the political equation on the USACA board?

I am less concerned about the change in the political equation, than I am concerned that these new members join the discourse, it’s the only way we would bring about change and help the game grow, while convincing the naysayers who believe that USA cricket would never get anywhere. Golam Sayeed, Mark Sood and Ajay Athavale - bring a fresh perspective to the board and they all represent three important regions.

While I appreciate that viewpoint, but it still takes a certain amount of political courage to effect change or for that matter, to block change. These new regional representatives, they are not necessarily a part of the Dainty camp....

I would like to not think of it as Dainty’s camp versus some other camp. I am sure that some of the individuals aligned with Mr. Dainty are independent thinkers and would not see themselves as described by you, unless of course, they share the same philosophical pursuits or agendas as he does.

But does President Dainty see things that way? Will he welcome the new members and his opponents and seek their divergent views, instead of seeing them as friends or foes?

You would have to ask him that question.

What caused your resignation from the Compliance Committee?

My sojourn as Compliance Officer was purely on an ad hoc basis, as seen fit by the president from time to time. I was asked by President Dainty to oversee the elections of the North West and South West Regions. I immediately co-opted the help of Ms. Lisa Brulport an employee of USACA and President Dainty suggested I add Mr. Shelton Glasgow to the committee, which I gladly did, in the hope that many hands make for light work.

Together, the three of us opted to divide the compliance check chores of the eleven leagues. I had the first four, Mr. Glasgow the next four and Ms. Brulport the remaining three leagues. We conducted our own investigation of the leagues assigned to us following a very simple list of compliance checkpoints. In the final analysis, we each ironically found one league in each of the three groups wanting, and not meeting the basic requirements as agreed upon by all eleven leagues.

I contacted President Dainty and informed him that the committee had found three leagues in non-compliance and I was planning on informing them. President Dainty immediately told me that the three leagues were members in good-standing and I did not have the authority to prevent them from voting. I assured him that the decision was not mine alone, but the committee’s. Further, I thought it was disingenuous of him to so determine without conducting any investigation or at least reviewing the basis of non-compliance of the three leagues. It suggested to me that there was a political connection with the three leagues in question and the USACA President.

Based on the hard work conducted by the committee under my stewardship, I thought it was unfair for President Dainty to dismiss the findings of the committee in such a manner, and without due cause. I therefore found it necessary to resign from such a position that was disrespected by the President of USACA, for political gain.

What is the process for approving new leagues? And what is the process of redress when a legitimate league is being blocked by political force?

A common practice used within the past three years has been to have the membership of a league, whether Associate or Full membership, be endorsed by the Regional Representative of the region, before approval by the board, purely as a matter of courtesy and responsibility of the Representative on the USACA board.

How about the MichCA and the Georgia Supreme leagues? These are well-recognized leagues and we hear that they were kept out for political reasons.

Time and time again both leagues provided an overwhelming amount of evidence to support their claims to Full Membership of USACA, only to be denied by President Dainty, and based solely on the word of the respective Regional Representatives for Central East and South East. It was obvious that the two leagues were not willing to lend political support to the two Regional Reps, in return for approval.

What about this new compliance process? Why now, just before an election?

In the summer, Mr. Shelton Glasgow issued a request for information from member leagues, suggesting that the information provided would be used to determine eligibility of those leagues to vote in USACA’s national elections. The information was hardly indicative of an eligibility process, but more so one of compliance, whereby leagues were asked to provide data that should have already been in USACA’s database.

In a dramatic turn of events resulting in the regional elections of the Atlantic Region, President Dainty supposedly asked that the results of that region’s board elections not be made known.

Why? Mr. Glasgow, a close ally of Mr. Dainty, was identified as the then Compliance Officer, is from that region and had vetted all the leagues within the region, clearing them to vote.

Following such a bungled administrative process of compliance, an Austin, TX based law firm emerged and is purporting to represent the USACA board in requesting information from each league, as the basis of a compliance review.

The USACA board did not approve the new compliance process or the firm conducting it?

I can categorically state here that the USACA board did not retain the services of the law firm, nor approved the compliance review criteria. It appears as though President Dainty and Treasurer Thickett retained the law firm on behalf of USACA, a decision that has certainly not received the support of at least six Regional Representatives, and a major portion of the leagues.

Will you be contemplating a rerun when elections are held?

By rerun, do you mean for Secretary of USACA? If so, I have not made up my mind, but what I do know is that I am a servant of the game and would always seek to serve the sport in the most humble and sincere manner, in some capacity or another.

I got involved in the administration of US cricket at the national level in 2007, when seventeen league presidents asked me to chair a League Presidents Reconciliation Commission – aimed at amicably resolving the issues that resulted in USACA being suspended twice by the ICC.

Despite being labeled as “Terrorists” by President Gladstone Dainty, myself and four other league presidents were able to arrange a meeting with the USACA board and WICB President Ken Gordon, along with other representatives of that ICC Americas Full Member, leading to a revision of USACA’s Constitution, subsequent elections in 2008 and the lifting of the ICC suspension. Since then, all I have ever wanted to do was serve US cricket with the greatest of integrity and transparency.

Among Nabeel Ahmed, Maq Qureshi, you know the men who have announced their candidacy for President, who is the better candidate? Who would have your support?

I have had discussions with several of the declared presidential candidates, including the two you mentioned, and they all bring different strengths to the table, some more so than others. However, those discussions have not been as in depth to provide me with the comfort level to declare my support for one candidate over another.

What would the new president need to do to get things moving? What are the top 3 things?

1. Restoring the credibility of USACA, to the level where the organization and its leadership may be trusted.
2. Demonstrate an objective approach to building a national coalition of cricket enthusiasts willing to put their shoulders to the wheel to help cricket grow from the grass root level up
3. Define a clear vision of positive leadership forward, while engaging and building partnerships with corporations, the USA Olympic Association and other entities to help the sport grow exponentially

Has there been any discussion on when the election will be held or won’t be held?

President Dainty along with the Atlantic Region’s Shelton Glasgow presented a time-line for regional and national elections, with the latter slated for October 15, 2011. However, to date no guidelines have been issued regarding the nomination process, etc., and the election is now less than a month away. Only time will tell if the national elections will be held this year and the manner in which it may be conducted.

Thanks for your time. Hopefully, USACA will find a way out of the impasse and will bridge the differences. Cricket has plenty of potential but there is really a crisis of confidence in USACA and that does not help the sport.

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these issues candidly, but I fervently hope that the next administration brings about some much-needed change. The power of the sport in this country does not rest in the hands of those sitting on the USACA board of directors, the real power lies in the hands of the leagues and those participating in the leagues. Cricketers need to stand up and own the cricket, for the sake and future of the sport in this country.

Those currently playing the sport should volunteer to coach in pee-wee-type cricket leagues, hopefully established by USACA, thereby exposing the sport to more American-born children. Such an initiative would ensure the growth and sustainability of the sport with a generation not before exposed. Together, with organizations such as the United States Youth Cricket Association, the sport will someday become a participating Olympic event for the USA and boasting players who would have been born and bred on the sport in this country.

Each cricket player should start giving back, while paying forward now.

-END-

USA Cricket: USACA Secretary 'disappointed' with ICC decision to cut Associates out of 2015 World Cup

openingbat — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 19:35:00 GMT

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook. Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

By Peter Della Penna

The ICC’s decision to eliminate Associate countries from the 2015 World Cup has predictably been met with outrage in the Associate world. USACA Secretary John Aaron was reached shortly after the decision was announced. Aaron was unhappy with the ICC’s decision and says it will prevent the game from being able to grow around the world.

“My reaction to it? Disappointment in a word, disappointed,” said Aaron. “I think one of the natural stepping stones for Associate countries to become Full Members is created by that pathway for World Cups. That’s what Associate countries aspire to and it provides them a platform upon which to gain ascendency to Full Member status. I think it’s a natural progression. Now if you stop it right in the middle there, then you’re not giving the Associate countries something tangible with which to aim for and I think that’s unfortunate because if we want to grow the sport, we’ve got to grow the sport and elevate it at all levels.”

“One of the ways of certainly increasing the exposure of the sport to more people with the potential for greater good is to provide that platform for ascendency and I think by taking that away, they’re in a sense denying… the full potential for the sport to really grow leaps and bounds in a shorter time, in a faster time.”

The USA senior team had been aiming to progress up the World Cricket League ladder in an attempt to reach an event that was labeled as the 2013 Cricket World Cup Qualifier in Scotland. Monday’s decision eliminated the possibility for any Associates to be given a chance to qualify for the World Cup through that or any other event. Aaron hopes that this will not discourage players in the USA, as well as other countries, but admits that it is a possibility that their motivation could taper off.

Image (right) - 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup logo. [Courtesy: ICC]

“I would hope that our vision is still to progress at all costs,” said Aaron. “Yes, that was part of our three-pronged approach which was being number 15 in 2015. Albeit we got set back by getting relegated back to Division Four, but that has nothing to do with it. If it was another country, I would feel the same way that we should have been given the opportunity. But now maybe more Associate countries might feel less inclined to want to work as hard if that goal, that brass ring, is no longer there.”

“It’s almost as if we’re hitting the proverbial glass ceiling. You can get as far as the top Associate, but you wouldn’t get a chance at that brass ring in the World Cup. In so far as the US is concerned, we will still continue to work feverishly to create a better product, a better team at all levels including the women and I don’t think that that should hamper us. But it’s one of those things that you set your eyes, you set as a target on and if that is taken away, it certainly diminishes in some way the effort that a lot of the Associate countries are putting into the sport right now.”

Aaron isn’t sure about whether the expansion of the 2012 World Twenty20 to 16 teams can be considered appropriate compensation for the Associates to make up for removing them from the World Cup and he hopes that the ICC will not only reconsider today’s decision, but overturn it.

“I can’t give an honest opinion because I wasn’t in the room and I don’t know what were all the considerations that were debated so I’m not in a position to comment on it fully, but I think whatever opportunities the Associate countries are provided, it’s another opportunity that is well taken and I think the Associate countries will take full advantage of it whatever is provided their way,” said Aaron. “I’m hoping that somewhere down the road, the ICC will reverse its decision and see that the greater good is to involve more Associate countries.”

USA Cricket's John Aaron on BBC Radio Gloucestershire

openingbat — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:22:00 GMT

John Aaron, Executive Secretary of the USA Cricket Asssociation was interviewed by BBC yesterday. John is in UK as a keynote speaker at the 50th anniversary awards dinner of Frocester Cricket Club.

Here is a snippet and some useful links.

John L. Aaron hopes to learn from Frocester Cricket Club

One of the men in charge of cricket in the USA has arrived in Gloucestershire on a fact finding mission.

John L. Aaron, secretary of the United States of America Cricket Association, has flown over to spend some time with Frocester Cricket Club near Stroud.

He is hoping to pick up tips to help develop the game on the 'other side of the pond'.

But just how big is the sport in the land you'd normally associate with American football, baseball, basketball and ice hockey?

"Cricket is relatively big in the USA compared to some of the other sports," said John.

"If American cricket is to grow you have to have a base and broaden that base.

"Frocester has a fantastic youth programme with kids as young as seven years old in camps and we are hoping to learn from them," he said.

John aims to return to Gloucestershire in 2011 with a team to play a number of matches locally.

Link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/gloucestershire/hi/people_and_places/newsid_9066000/9066585.stm

Radio link (good for 5 days): The John Aaron portion of the show begins around 1 hr 17 minutes 30 seconds on the following link -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/p00b9qf0

NewInning.com

openingbat — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:58:00 GMT

Ram Varadarajan, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur with a solid track record is running for USACA against the incumbent Gladstone Dainty. Ram's candidacy is great news for USA cricket. Finally, there is a good chance that someone with vision and application will take over USACA. I really hope he wins. If he loses, then cricketers will end up with with another 3 years of stagnation.

Check out their aptly titled website newinning.com.