News Feed

December 8, 2016 - No easy exit from sugar, warns Sinckler Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler ... +++ December 8, 2016 - Communication is key, warns Collymore In the face ongoing water, sewage a ... +++ December 8, 2016 - It’s a disgrace! An impassioned chairperson of the B ... +++ December 8, 2016 - Former BTA worker had ‘300 sick days in one year’ The Employment Rights Tribunal hear ... +++ December 8, 2016 - Burke hits new heights Barbados top ranked surfer on the W ... +++ December 8, 2016 - Economic headwinds ahead, says Jordan Advisory Partner at Pricewaterhouse ... +++

Stumped!

WICB seeking to recover its investment in Twenty20 globetrotters

West Indies’ itinerant Twenty20 specialists and the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) are on another collision course. And following his recent criticisms of the WICB, T20 tradesman Kieron Pollard is the first to find himself at loggerheads with the regional board once again.

Pollard has been denied a No-Objection Certificate to compete in South Africa’s Ram Slam T20 Challenge, after the WICB made the unprecedented move of levying 20 per cent of the contract fee on any Caribbean player wishing to participate in an overseas T20 tournament.

Kieron Pollard (l) likely to miss South Africa’s Twenty20 domestic tournament.

Kieron Pollard (l) likely to miss South Africa’s Twenty20 domestic tournament.

Pollard, who signed a two-year contract last season with Cape Cobras, was informed of the WICB decision on November 3 by the board’s chief executive officer Michael Muirhead in an emailed letter. He is currently still in Trinidad, with the tournament due to get underway on November 11.

Muirhead called the move a “policy” decision, taken by the WICB board of directors. He also said that the WICB had notified all the ICC Full Member boards of this decision.

“The WICB will levy a charge for the granting of an NOC for West Indian cricketers seeking a release to participate in Leagues outside the jurisdiction of the West Indies,” Muirhead informed Pollard in the email, which has been accessed by ESPNcricinfo. “This will be an amount equivalent to 20 per cent of the player fee (as defined in the player contract) that is actually paid to the relevant player.”

Pollard was told he would not be granted the NOC until the WICB had received “acceptance of our position” from the various boards which feature Caribbean players in their domestic T20 tournaments.

It is understood that the Bangladesh Cricket Board is considering a 10 per cent payment, but might ask the BPL franchises to carry out such a payment. Cricket South Africa has rejected the WICB proposal while there has been no response as yet from the Pakistan Cricket Board and Cricket Australia.

The Federation of International Players’ Association (FICA) has described the WICB decision as “restraint of trade” and warned that it could attract legal challenges.

Muirhead argued that a release fee was necessary given how many Caribbean players are now seeking to maximise their earnings in the various T20 tournaments around the world.

“WICB however, having invested in developing a player’s talent, is not able to realise a return on its investment if the player is not available to play in local tournament, which would allow lesser experienced players the opportunity to face a more experienced and skilled opposition, thereby improving on the standard and competitiveness of the domestic tournaments,” he wrote.

However, the move comes as little surprise to seasoned observers of the current WICB administration. The board has consistently said that senior players who earn big money in the T20 leagues need to compromise and give back something to the regional cricket. Otherwise, as Muirhead noted to Pollard, it “disadvantages” the West Indies team.

“In the end, it compromises the standard of the WICB’s international team and that team’s performance internationally. The primacy of international cricket is threatened.”

Muirhead stated in his email that the WICB move could not be called as restraint of trade. “While we do not wish to act in restraint of trade, we must seek a balance to ensure that there is fair and adequate compensation for the investment made in the players,” he wrote. “What WICB seeks is some compensation to recognise the investment made into players, an investment from which another Full Member is benefitting.”

Although Pollard is the only player officially contacted by WICB so far, many other Caribbean players are predicting a similar email in their inbox at some point in the near future.

Muirhead said the board could put the fees collected for an NOC from various players into a pot which then could be redistributed as contracts to players who only play T20. Pollard, along with the former West Indies captain Darren Sammy, are some of the prominent voices who have asked WICB to offer them T20 contracts.

“It is our expectation too, that the accumulation of these fees will facilitate the offer of contracts to players participating only in the short format of the game,” Muirhead said.

Pollard, however, is not even a contracted WICB player, having been controversially dropped for the tri-series in Zimbabwe, scheduled for later this month. And for that reason, Tony Irish, the FICA chairman, believes that the move is unjustified.

“We have made it very clear to all the boards that any restrictions placed on players are likely to constitute restraint of trade and there challengeable legally,” he said. “In the case of Kieron, he is not even contracted by the WICB. Therefore their attempt to levy 20 per cent in exchange for the NOC effectively imposes a restriction on freedom of movement.”

Irish called the decision arbitrary, considering the WICB had not even discussed the move with players and the other boards. He added that he will be speaking directly to the WICB tomorrow about a decision that looks set to prevent Pollard from fulfilling his second year of the contract with the Cobras.

“It is not a good situation. I will be taking it directly as a FICA issue with the WICB and making them aware of the implications.”

Insignia Sports, who manage Pollard along with other leading West Indies players including Sammy, Chris Gayle and Dwayne Bravo, has also said it will be challenging the WICB move.

“It is a blatant restraint of trade on a player who has not been selected by WICB for the upcoming tri-series, does not have a contractual tie to the WICB permitting such a restriction,” said Eddie Tolchard, one of the partners at Insignia Sports. “Applying an unreasonable and unjustifiable fee and requesting CSA pay it in order to provide a NOC is a restraint of trade.”

Pollard, Sammy and Bravo have been highly critical of the WICB over the past months with the three making several scathing remarks about president Dave Cameron and his management of the organisation.

Source: (cricinfo)

6 Responses to Stumped!

  1. Meakai November 7, 2016 at 11:54 pm

    Way to go WICB, clueless as ever. Show them who is boss. I wonder what will your response be when T20 tournaments realise they no longer need ICC’s blessings?

    Reply
  2. Walter Prescod November 8, 2016 at 8:09 am

    This WICB should be behind bars some where in America.
    Who do they think they are? This is a unjustifiable request
    Cameron and his mafia will someday answer to the people of the WI. Another nail in the WIC. coffin

    Reply
  3. Donild Trimp November 8, 2016 at 11:58 am

    Cluless people and I though the current legal adviser was a brilliant mind.

    How can you restrict a person from plying his or her trade to earn a livelihood when there is no contract between you and that individual?

    Am I missing something here or is this a Caribbean thing?

    Is it that people in the Caribbean can blatantly ignore the law and fear no consequences?

    Reply
  4. Donild Trimp November 8, 2016 at 11:59 am

    That should be “clueless people”

    Reply
  5. Rajesh ramlall November 8, 2016 at 3:41 pm

    West indies cricket board should go to jail you don’t pick a players and then you want him to suffer from your stupidity

    Reply
  6. Garfield Malcolm November 8, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    I do not agree with the WICB’s decision, however, I believe west Indian players who became exposed because of regional cricket, should not turn there back on the region in the name of making big bucks. They should remember where they are coming from, the world would not have known them if regional selecters didn’t pick them in the first place. These cricketers are not interested neither are they contributing anything to West Indies cricket. They should pay back sometime.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *