Cricket South Africa (CSA) briefed the Committee on its Annual Report; Strategic Plan and Development Programmes for the financial year 2012/13. The Committee expressed its dissatisfaction with the late submission of CSA’s presentation, as that did not afford it the opportunity to deal with it thoroughly.
CSA said that that the costs of maintaining cricket were rising, while revenue was not rising at the same rate. Even though there had been marked progress in the transformation of cricket in the country, CSA was still not satisfied. It had recently put R30 million into an indoor cricket development facility in Pretoria, and all the cricket academies across the country would feed into that centre of excellenc. CSA maintained that transformation was not mutually exclusive to excellence, as it had been able to transform without compromising its international reputation.
The Committee noted that even the new board of directors of CSA was still gender biased, and said one female board member did not really make a difference. Therefore transformation was not progressing as well as reported. Although everyone supported the notion of independent directors, it had been noticed that there were no executive directors, and even the CEO was not a director. Was CSA’s philosophy, in developing talent of colour, to take youngsters from their rural communities and put them through traditional sporting schools, or to take them through the academies and keep them in their communities? The Committee asked what the main problem was with actually bringing back silverware for the nation, because being number one and having no trophies to show for it was just not satisfactory.
CSA replied that the composition of the board was a reality that found expression in cricket, and which CSA needed to attend to in terms of transforming cricket entirely. The challenge that it had was that when electing the board, the current serving Presidents of affiliates were the primary consideration. At that level, there were no women Presidents within the affiliates when the AGM had taken place, and that reflected the patriarchal history of cricket. The board had been a response to a period of instability and challenges at the level of governance within CSA. The situation had been that in the past board, the CEO and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) had been executive directors. The challenges within CSA at the time had been surrounding the CEO of CSA. So when the report came, it made a clear recommendation that said, in the formulation of the new board, the CEO should not be a director.
SRSA said that one important element of the school sport structure framework, was the establishment of the school sport focus schools. The intention of these schools was to make sure that in areas where there was currently no infrastructure and support, the development of the learners that had been identified as talented was accelerated.
CSA recognised that there needed to be a long-term plan and short-term success. That meant youngsters could be pushed through traditional schools to get their progression accelerated, and that was where the Sunfoil trust was being used to provide bursaries for black African children. This was happening in tandem with the Malekutu-like development programmes in rural areas across the country.
The Committee asked what the relationship was between CSA and the Ngumbela Cricket Tournament, which was held in the Eastern Cape, at Healdtown. Were CSA’s plans in line with the National Sport and Recreation Plan (NSRP)? CSA replied that there was no formal relationship with Ngumbela, but it would provide support wherever it could do so. It still needed to be more involved in ascertaining whether CSA’s strategy was aligned with the NSRP, but CSA engaged regularly with SRSA.
The South African Football Association (SAFA) had raised about R30m to R40m to support the implementation of the Technical Master Plan of its Development Agency. It had recorded a loss because of the general global economic downturn and the bad publicity it had received from the match fixing scandal. The disconnection between the Department of Basic Education (DBE) and SRSA needed serious attention, as school sport was the only way to address the transformation challenge. In the last four months, SAFA had trained 73 coaches with an A-licence.
The Committee wanted to know what implications the staff reductions had for SAFA. Had the match fixing scandal investigation been concluded? What lessons and programmes had SAFA learnt and was planning to implement, based on spectator analysis? Could SAFA comment on the progress made in dealing with challenges in player release for national duty? How much did the academy in KwaZulu-Natal cost?
SAFA said it had reduced its staff complement by 36 persons over a period of 18 months, and the reduction had been through attrition. As people moved jobs, their portfolios would fall away. The match fixing scandal had not been dealt with, and in fact this was an issue that plagued over 70 countries globally, and pervaded every sport. The spectator analysis related to viewers, but engagement with the football supporting public was the responsibility of provincial associations, and there was possibly a need for broader engagement. When SA won the CAF trophy in 2000, there had been a domestic league of 20 teams, with each team having a complement of ten SA players. That gave Clive Barker a pool of 200 players to select from. The league had since contracted to 16 teams, where there could be six local players and five foreign players in each team. Effectively, Gordon Igesund now had only 96 players to choose the national team from. SAFA had also clarified with the PSL that clubs could not count naturalized citizens as indigenous citizens, because those six players had to be eligible for national selection.
As the Chairperson was late, Mr M Dikgacwi (ANC) was elected as the acting Chairperson. He asked the Committee to introduce itself to CSA and for the CSA delegation to do likewise. He said the standard practice was for presenters to send their presentations seven days in advance of the presentation, and thereafter expressed the Committee’s hope that CSA in future would keep that in mind when called upon to account to the Committee on cricket matters. CSA needed to brief the Committee over development, governance and the recent media comments regarding cricket in general. The discussion would be frank and robust at times, but CSA was requested to not take anything personally.
Mr Chris Nenzani, President, CSA introduced his delegation and apologised for the late submission of CSA’s presentation. He expressed CSA’s gratitude for the opportunity it had been given to account to the nation on how it ran cricket. He understood the Chairperson to be most interested in the restructuring of the International Cricket Council (ICC), which would be dealt with in the presentation, and said that the last time CSA appeared before the Committee, it was operating with an acting Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and an acting President. Since then, CSA had held an annual general meeting in February 2013, where it had elected its current board. After the judge Chris Nicholson inquiry into governance and restructuring of CSA, the current board had been constituted in accord with the recommendations of that inquiry. There were seven directors with a cricket background, the President and his deputy, and two from the cooperate world. Excluding the President and his deputy, there were nine independent directors, which would give an independent thought component within CSA. CSA felt it had set the standard for sport governance in South Africa (SA), and that it would be able to deal with its challenges in a manner that was in line with best practice principles internationally.
Cricket SA; Briefing and deliberations on Annual Report; Strategic Plan and Development Programmes
Mr Haroon Lorgat, CEO, CSA said that the costs of maintaining cricket were rising, while revenue was not rising at the same rate. Even though there was marked progress in the transformation of cricket in the country, CSA was still not satisfied. Through Supersport, cricket viewership was at around 800 000, whereas with the South African Broadcasting Cooperation (SABC), it had about 2 million viewers.
Since none of the under 19 national squads had won any silver in recent years and were desperate to win something, Mr Lorgat said he had advised them to forget the desperation and just play the game for enjoyment. There were six women players contracted for the SA women’s national team on a full-time basis, and a coach as well.
CSA had recently put R30 million into an indoor cricket development facility in Pretoria, and all the cricket academies across the country would feed into that centre of excellence. The challenge for CSA was to maintain facilities after it had put them up. If Vernon Philander, number one test bowler in the world, was a reflection of the type of talent in SA, then CSA had lost a fair amount of talent among people of colour. CSA maintained that transformation was not mutually exclusive to excellence, as it had been able to transform without compromising its international reputation. Through the fundraising effort of the “Pink Day”, CSA had been able to donate about R 375 000 to breast cancer. (See document for more details)
The Chairperson applauded CSA’s presentation, but repeated that the Committee had not had time to engage with it.
Ms G Sindane (ANC) supported the Chairperson’s sentiments. She was not satisfied with Mr Nenzani’s response that CSA was not aware it had to submit documents a week before the briefing, because that was not the first appearance of CSA before the Committee. She noted that even the new board of directors of CSA was still gender biased, and said one female board member did not really make a difference. Therefore transformation was not progressing as well as reported, because even on the sporting field one black African athlete did not show any balance of gender within CSA. She suggested that CSA co-opt female board members if it had an opportunity to do so, so that the profile and issues of women could be raised within the cricketing fraternity. She applauded CSA’s development and transformation efforts, because as soon as she heard and saw Malekutu in Limpopo mentioned, she was a bit mollified. CSA had not mentioned any plans to do development in the newly opened Universities in the Northern Cape and Mpumalanga, but since Malekutu was in the development stages, possibly those universities were in the pipeline for cricket development as well. Therefore, if CSA could also use those institutions, together with schools like Malekutu as its pilot, then possibly the national Under-19 squad could win something, if it had players who had come through that kind of development.
Mr G MacKenzie (COPE) said that although everyone supported the notion of independent directors, he had noticed that there were no executive directors. Even the CEO was not a director, and he wanted comment on that. A lot of the independent directors were cricket people -- how independent were they? Were the international broadcasting rights negotiated between the ICC and the CSA? Did any affiliate have a chance to discuss its own broadcasting rights, if the income stream of those rights came through the CSA? What percentage went to the affiliates and how much did CSA keep for itself? What was the split in revenue for SA in the T20 tournament? He said that the Committee was extremely aware of the issues that the Department of Basic Education (DBE) had with sports in general. It shared CSA’s frustration that there was a perception that DBE had not bought into schools’ sport. CSA needed to pursue that challenge, because without school cricket in general, cricket would always suffer like other sports as well. The Committee would like CSA’s feedback on that issue when it appeared again. Talking about the Proteas being number one, it was extremely worrying that the Under-19 team never got anywhere. With the likes of Jacques Kallis, who had been the backbone of the Proteas, he was interested on how CSA would replace him and the Under-19 problems really needed attention. Was the SRSA giving any bursaries in the rural areas, to promising and talented youngsters in cricket, male or female, as there was something like that in the Border region for rugby?
The Chairperson also wanted to know: when SA prepared a wicket at Kingsmead cricket oval and were playing the Indian national team, why was the Indian team given a “feather bed,” when SA should have been going for home ground advantage?
Mr MacKenzie commented that Hashim Amla and other cricketers of colour had come from traditional cricketing schools. Was CSA’s philosophy, in developing talent of colour, to take youngsters from their rural communities and put them through traditional schools or to take them through the academies and keep them in their communities? What was the racial breakdown of spectators at test match and affiliate cricket?
Ms M Dube (ANC) asked what the main problem was with actually bringing back silverware for the nation, because being number one and having no trophies to show for it was just not satisfactory.
The Chairperson reminded CSA that there was no malicious intent in the way questions were being asked.
Mr Nenzani said that the composition of the board was a reality that found expression in cricket, and which CSA needed to attend to in terms of transforming cricket entirely. The challenge that CSA had was that when electing the board, the current serving presidents of affiliates were the primary consideration. At that level, there were no women presidents within the affiliates when the AGM took place, and that reflected the patriarchal history of cricket. Currently there was progress in that regard, as the Free State affiliate had a female president, and hopefully other affiliates would follow suit. CSA took Ms Sindane’s advice to heart, that it should perhaps look at co-option. It was going to take time, because the patriarchal structure within cricket needed to be unravelled.
He said that the current board was an outcome of the of the Nicholson recommendations to the Minister of SRSA. It was a response to a period of instability and challenges at the level of governance within CSA. The situation had been that in the past board, the CEO and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) had been executive directors of the board. The above-mentioned challenges within CSA at the time had been surrounding the CEO of CSA. So when the report came out, it made a clear recommendation that said, in the formulation of the new board, that the CEO should not be a director. There were currently challenges with that, of course. For instance, the CEO could take decisions that were not in the best interests of CSA, because he knew that he did not have the fiduciary duties of a director. That was a matter that CSA wanted to rectify going forward, because it was important to have the CEO as an executive director on the board. Hopefully, before the next AGM, that situation would have been corrected.
CSA reminded the Committee that it had put in place in its Memorandum of Intent (MOI), a clause that said an individual needed to qualify as an independent director after having certain kinds of recommendations. One of those key requirements was that the person should not have had any contact with cricket in the preceding three years. That matter had been taken to arbitration by one of the nominees, who had gone through to the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC), and CSA had lost that arbitration. Independence became difficult when one had to deal with whether there was someone who was really independent, because then independence became a perception. Was one perceived by the public to be independent? Did the fact that one had been away from cricket in any manner qualify one as an independent? CSA’s view on independence was that it was not a matter of association only, but was also whether one could take and make independent decisions as a person -- without having come from a history where one had been influenced by one’s association, contacts, and connections with a particular structure that served within cricket. So far CSA believed the independents that were on its board were beginning to show their independent thought, and that cricket was benefiting from their independence.
Mr Lorgat said that ICC would have no involvement whatever in the sale of SA international broadcasting. CSA would engage with potential broadcasters who were seeking to acquire the rights, and the deal would be between the two parties only. Whatever surplus remained from the distribution of the rights revenue, after the affairs of running cricket in the country had been administered, it all went back to the affiliates and development programmes. There were a lot of programmes funded directly by CSA on behalf of its affiliates. There was better alignment and consistency across the country, with the strategies and better economic gains in centralising the use of that revenue. CSA kept nothing from the remaining revenue, apart from the reserves, which were to smooth over the four-year cycle for affiliates.
He said there had been a very good ‘excuse’ from the Kingsmead ground staff, especially its chief executive, and there was a fair amount of truth to it. There had been a lot of rain preceding the match against India, and the pitch had been covered for an extended period as a result. Clearly, it had been requested that the Proteas have home ground advantage. Effectively the staff had two days before the match to prepare the pitch, and CSA had tough words for them -- and even with the Wanderers staff -- because both those pitches had certainly not favoured the country at all. Mr Lorgat said that Dr Cyster would talk more on that issue, as one wanted to play and extend a test match to five days. to provide the supporters with content, and one would not want to prepare a “green top”, as it possibly would be finished in three days. That was also the kind of tension that sometimes existed between CSA and an affiliate.
Dr Peter Cyster, Vice President, CSA, said that was also the reason that CSA had a standardised model, from the top down, where one of the areas things could differ, was at games. That was where affiliates chose pitches and could physically make more money from ticket sales. Other than that, CSA centralised everything, because it got a much better deal from selling games. CSA was also currently looking at the advertising boards, especially the Kimberley ones. The income that an affiliate derived from that advertising was far less than what could be made at the Wanderers.
If CSA sold those rights, much more could be made, even for the smaller provinces, in comparison to the bigger ones. It was looking at its accounting and expenditure policies, to have a top-down model and for distributing all the revenue from CSA. He said there was autonomy in some areas, but this sometimes hurt cricket generally as well.
After the Cricket World Cup of 2003, CSA had spent a substantial amount on legacy projects. Returning there a few years ago, it had found all those facilities gone, because after erecting the facility, it handed it over to a municipality. It was shameful that after all that, one found the facility had acquired a new utility, which was not its original purpose. It was important, from a sporting body perspective, that after investing that much money in developing rural sporting infrastructure, the local government authority should assist sporting bodies. He pleaded with the Committee to assist in that regard.
Perhaps co-opting women into cricket was one of the requirements needed to win the World Cup, but the previous board had three black representatives, apart from the affiliate presidents. CSA had certainly outgrown that, because from the affiliate presidents across the country, one could see definite racial representativity. CSA was looking at women and there was desperate need also, given the example of Zola Thamae, the Free State affiliate president, who had done exceptionally well. Dr Cyster believed that any sporting culture in families started with mothers, and therefore if women got more involved in cricket, this would create a stronger component of cricket-playing children.
Mr Lorgat said CSA certainly would partner SRSA in engaging DBE to try and unlock school cricket. He conceded that the Amlas had indeed been from traditional schools, but what CSA had recognised was that there needed to be a long-term plan and short term success. This meant that those youngsters who could be pushed through traditional schools to get the progression accelerated, should be supported, and that was where the Sunfoil trust was being used to provide bursaries for black African children. This was in tandem with the Malekutu-like development programmes in rural areas across the country.
He did not have the exact racial breakdown statistics on spectators at international matches in particular, but from what he had seen -- in Durban particularly -- the profile had definitely changed, with far more black people coming to the matches. The reason that cricket did not get spectators regularly was that it was difficult for them to come to matches. CSA had developed what were called “near-field communications” (NFC), where a programme was to be launched soon, called ‘love cricket.’ This would allow one to buy tickets online anywhere, where they could be downloaded to a particular card, and when one went to matches, one could tap or swipe and walk in. The real benefit of that card though, was that CSA could track and speak to cricket supporters. It would show what profile they were, how many games they went to, andwhich type of matches they preferred. That would enable CSA to communicate the specific types of games that individual preferred, and would certainly provide the statistics that Mr Mackenzie required.
Not winning medals certainly troubled everyone, from management to the Proteas. Mr Lorgat encouraged the Committee to watch a DVD called “The road to number one,” which had been supplied to Committee Members. This had been a piece of work that had been engineered by the Proteas themselves, and detailed the introspection that all the players had gone through to make the Proteas the team that they were currently. He hoped that that frankness exhibited by the players, which lead to the gelling of the team like that, translated into a trophy in the upcoming tournament in Bangladesh, or the next one in Australia in 2015.
Mr Lorgat said that nowhere in the world was there a three-in-one player like Jacque Kallis, who got picked for batting, bowling and fielding. In the past three years, Kallis has not been the sole backbone of the Proteas. When he was convenor of selection, he would close his eyes if Kallis was out, because it would be pure luck if the Proteas went past 200 runs. Currently there was Hashim Amla, AB De Villiers and the player that would bat at number four on 12 February would probably be Faf du Plessis, if he had to guess. There was enough depth in bowling to take wickets without Kallis. Overall there was enough depth in the team to work without Kallis.
Ms Sumayya Khan, Chief Operations Officer (COO), SRSA reminded the Committee that SRSA had held the National Schools Sport Championships in 2012 and 2013. Immediately after the competition in 2012, the Minister of SRSA had awarded 14 bursaries to deserving learners from that competition, and in 2013, 28 bursaries were awarded to learners. The focus was on priority sporting codes in that competition, and each bursary totalled about R100 000. This covered tuition, uniform, accommodation and more especially, sport support services for the learners. The reason for that was that not all the learners could be placed in traditional sporting schools or sport focus schools, so they were offered support in terms of going to district academies or universities that offered a sport programme. Those services included sport science, testing and coaching services, and gymnasiums that an athlete would require. This was the Ministerial bursary for learners from grade 8 to 12.
SRSA had signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Culture, Arts, Tourism, Sport Sector Education and Training Authority (CATHSETA). That memorandum offered a postgraduate development programme, where SRSA offered bursaries to university students for their Masters and Ph D studies. In those offers, the research that would be done needed to be in line with the National Sport and Recreation Plan (NSRP). In 2013, ten Masters and 20 Ph D students had received these bursaries, where one of the conditions of the bursaries was that when SRSA had its research conference at each year end, the students had to share their research work with the delegates at the conference. Additionally, Gauteng had offered 20 bursaries to learners in its schools in 2013. KwaZulu Natal (KZN) also had a similar programme for its sporting learners.
Ms Onke Mjo, Chief Director, SRSA said that one important element of the school sport structure framework was the establishment of the school sport focus schools. The intention of those schools was to make sure that in areas where there was currently no infrastructure and support, the development of the learners that had been identified as talented was accelerated. That was a long term solution for SRSA. Rather than removing the children from their communities, it was the development of those schools where the children originated from so that in future they could be better prepared and equipped to keep talented learners within their communities. For example, a child that came from King Williams Town would be moved to Dale High School, which was a traditional sporting school. There was also an intention, in the partnership that SRSA had with DBE, to develop those African traditional sporting schools to also curb the movement of children from their communities.
Ms Khan said that three girls had been selected in 2013 from the school sport championship for cricket bursaries, with two from KZN and one from the Eastern Cape. To date, SRSA did not have an undergraduate tertiary plan.
The Chairperson asked whether CSA had a database for school cricket participants. What was the relationship between CSA and the Ngumbela Cricket Tournament held in the Eastern Cape, at Healdtown? What had been the conclusion of the batting scandal that had once affected cricket in the country, and where were those on the wrong side of the law? How far had CSA gone in implementing all the recommendations of the Nicholson inquiry? How much of the revenue generated from the ICC events went to provinces and lower structures? How were clubs accessing funding from CSA’s affiliates, especially those local clubs in Oudtshoorn which were affiliated to the South Western District (SWD)? Were CSAs plans in line with the national sports and recreation plan (NSRP)?
Dr Cyster replied that four years ago, CSA had started working with the Blacks in Consulting Group. Over the last year an excessive amount of time had gone into recording different types of information from the clubs and the schools on a database. All of that information was available on CSA’s website. From the Under-13 clubs upwards, some of which were in the KFC mini-cricket league, all were on the database. There was even footage of the facilities in use at club level. For example in the Boland, the federation actually started physically going to facilities and inspecting and recording their state of repair so that when clubs went to the district offices with clubhouse grievances, the district could know how to respond.
CSA probably had the best performance system in the world, with Perfomax, where the Proteas were concerned, from fat content, fitness levels and the medical status of players. That database was available for scrutiny, but in some regions it was better maintained than in others. Those regions that had not complied with the record-keeping regulations, were given until September 2014. If one was looking for a left-arm spin bowler in Border region, the database could give five to six players.
Mr Lorgat said that there was no formal relationship with Ngumbela, but CSA would provide support wherever it could do so. Ray Mali had also started a similar tournament in East London.
CSA would not tolerate batting match fixing. Even Mr Lorgat was infamous a few years ago, as he had caused some Pakistani cricketers to be put behind bars. Certainly CSA could not tolerate corruption. Currently there was batting scandal in the country, not withstanding that this had happened shortly after Mr Lorgat was appointed. He had recruited and appointed an anti-corruption official, and as such CSA took that element seriously.
ICC revenue eventually trickled down to affiliates, because CSA paid for whatever it needed to run competitions and development programmes, but the remainder went to provinces. It went all the way to clubs as well, notwithstanding that there was always a limitation on the demand for resources, as there simply was not enough to run everything. SWD was recently troubled, as it had to be taken to arbitration, where there seemed to be challenges between a club and the affiliate, with the President of CSA having to pull rank. Eventually though, CSA depended on the officials of the affiliates, so there was some level of autonomy, where each region had to ensure that it delivered on CSA’s strategy. Mr Lorgat still needed to be more involved in ascertaining CSA’s strategy was aligned with the NSRP, but CSA engaged regularly with SRSA.
Mr Nenzani said that the Nicholson report recommendations were far reaching. Subsequent to that report, CSA had gone through a process of restructuring, wherein it developed material from its own view, in order to respond to the report as it stood. One of the issues raised in the report was the percentage of funding that went to the lowest levels of cricket in the country, which were grassroots. Having presented already, the Committee would be aware that 23% of CSA’s funding went into development of cricket in the country. The challenges that CSA had was that it was dealing with funding that was mainly sourced from sponsorships, and unfortunately where it was needed most, there was no glitz and glamour. Ultimately there was no attraction for sponsors to get involved at grassroots. What CSA had done was to look at its entire funding regime, so that it could see how best it could ensure that funding reached the grassroots level. The Nicholson report also touched on the tax status of CSA, and National Treasury (NT) and the CFO dealt with that issue. CSA was shown to be not flawed where tax regulations were concerned, as it was doing work of a developmental nature. From the same report and deliberations with SASCOC, CSA needed to ensure that all geo-political provinces were represented at CSA level. Additionally SASCOC was very keen in ensuring that CSA had a national footprint.
The Chairperson was concerned about the selection of players. He asked whether CSA nursed and followed players of colour that had national colours. For example, Thami Tsolekile and AB de Villiers were selected to go to India, as wicketkeeper and batsman respectively. Both had not performed well with the bat at that tournament. Coming back from there, Tsolekile was dropped. Why were players of colour given only one chance to prove themselves? There was an opening batsman who had featured well in the T20s, Lungile Bosman. He had disappeared, and that really concerned the Chairperson. In France, where he had gone on a study tour, the French were so good with their sport database, that they could tell you when a player was injured, who had treated him, and where he currently was after recovery. For lack of proper guidance, young sports personalities fell through the cracks, because those players of colour were being exposed for the first time to large amounts of money. What was in place to assist the up and coming players of colour with handling money and general mentoring?
Mr Lorgat agreed with the Chairperson that mentorship was indeed needed, and to that end he had asked Dr Mohammed Moosajee, the Proteas’ team manager, to take a particular stance on mentorship of up and coming youngsters. He had to draw a list of people to serve as mentors. Certainly a 19-year old who was getting his first salary of up to R 50 000 and had just landed a sponsorship deal, needed a support structure of that nature. With the Sunfoil educational trust at grassroots, a youngster had to elect or select a mentor to be eligible for the bursary.
Dr Cyster said the other issue he and Mr Nenzani had talked about for the past two years, was to think about developing cricketers and sports individuals holistically. Since Unisa, University of Johannesburg and Fort Hare were already CSA partners, what the management would like to see was all players getting a tertiary education. That in itself matured individuals and could inculcate responsibility within cricketers and sports personalities in general.
Mr Nenzani said that CSA had noted the Chairperson’s concerns, and that the opportunities that CSA offered needed to be quality opportunities. Hopefully at the next briefing, CSA would be able to say it had tracked and measured the opportunities it had created, and would have information on progress with those players who would have used those opportunities. It was important that the entire system had confidence and faith in an African player as he moved through the ranks.
ICC Restructure (see document)
The ICC currently had ten full Members and 96 associate and affiliate Members. Its board was comprised of its full members and three representatives of the associate and affiliated Members, with the President and Vice President of the ICC. On 9 January, the full Members had a meeting in Dubai, where a working group in the Finance and Commercial Affairs Committee of the ICC put before the full Members certain proposals. The aggregate impact of those proposals would be to restructure the ICC completely. Those proposals were also put before CSA. The first proposal was that because there were different contributions to the ICC’s revenue, the distribution to its various Members should therefore be on a sliding scale. Essentially 65% of the ICC revenue would be distributed on equal bases, with the remaining 35% would be distributed on a sliding scale, recognizing the contributions that the various countries were making towards the ICC’s revenue. Additionally, there would be a ceremonial President and a Chairperson of the ICC board, who would actually be running the ICC. The Chairperson would come from either the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the England and Wales Cricket Board (EWCB) or Cricket Australia (CA). The chairmanship would in perpetuity be shared amongst the three countries only.
The Finance and Commercial Affairs Committee would also be chaired by an individual coming from either of those countries, in perpetuity. A new executive Committee advising the ICC board would be established, and it also would be chaired in perpetuity by the same group of three.
The same three boards would be immune from relegation in the lead up to the Cricket World Cup. There would be a test fund to support countries playing test matches that resulted in a loss of revenue, due to there being no appeal for sponsors in those matches. CSA had been excluded from the fund at that stage, as it was felt it did not need the fund. The Future Tours Programme (FTP) was actually a calendar of fixtures between countries, where countries made money in terms of broadcast rights and sponsorships. The Committee was reminded that CSA had lost a lot of money when India came and never finished its full tour. The FTP would also be changed, so that countries agreed to it on a bilateral basis, which meant the countries would sign a binding agreement between themselves.
CSA had met and resolved that it could not accept some of the terms of the proposal, and Mr Nenzani had been mandated to raise the issues of contention at the ICC. Additionally there was a resolution that CSA needed to send a letter to the ICC President, Mr Alan Isaac, over matters of process. That letter was sent and published by CSA. The following ICC meeting took place on the 28/29 January in Dubai, wherein CSA had refused to agree with some of those matters, especially where a different class of Members of the ICC was created, and which class would run ICC Committees in perpetuity, without any challenge from anyone else to lead some of the Committees.
CSA had engaged in bilaterals with a number of countries. There had been certain concessions that had been made by the conclave of three, subsequent to CSA’s strong stance around some of the issues. Mr Nenzani had also been in contact with some of the Presidents of the boards that had been the originators of the proposals.
The changes that CSA found in Dubai were that CSA was going to be included in the test fund, which was $10 million annually, to cushion whatever losses a certain board shall have incurred. The FTP would remain as proposed, with a binding agreement between two countries. All those measures would be transitional, from 2014 to 2016, where the issues would be board resolutions and the content of which would be re-evaluated to seek improvement. The chairing of the Committees would be locked within the transitional period, at the end of which anyone could run to head any of the Committees. CSA had also been in a position to recommend that more Members be added to the ICC subcommittees, and that had been done. Moreover, the issue of immunity to relegation was removed, which meant that affiliates, and especially the associate, could then have an FTP arrangement with any of the full Membership countries in the ICC. All that remained at the time was whether CSA should agree to the improved proposal on the spot.
CSA, Pakistan and Sri Lanka had pushed for a deferral of the decision to the next meeting, so that they all could go and consult with their stakeholders respectively. CSA had consulted and afterwards accepted that that was not a perfect situation, and that there had been vast improvements from the original document. Key to that understanding was the notion that this was a transitional period, and therefore there was an opportunity during this period to engage on content and detail. CSA then considered voting in favour of the new proposal so that the ICC could proceed forward, and also so that CSA could reclaim its position of influence at the centre of the ICC. CSA had voted for passing the resolutions in Singapore on 8 February.
Mr Nenzani explained that he was requesting Mr Lorgat to add comments if he wanted, but cautiously so, because there was an ongoing investigation at the ICC, in which Mr Lorgat was being investigated over whether he had had any link with a particular article in print media in October 2013. As a result, CSA had offered the CEO the opportunity of involving himself with any dealings with the BCCI and the ICC until the investigation was concluded.
Mr Lorgat commented on the process of restructuring the ICC, saying that the intentions of some of the individuals there, and the implications of that process, should not be underestimated. The restructuring was a personality driven proposal, as opposed to a principle driven one. The nexus behind the restructuring was that certain individuals wanted to take control of the ICC. CSA had done very well to stand its ground over its position. The transitional period was also not ideal, but the Committee had to imagine the powers that had been at play there. That was also true from the fact that the investigation against him was, he felt, an engineered way to ensure he was not around the table. If there was one person with the knowledge and relationships to garner the rest against the proposal, it probably would have been him. He had no knowledge of his involvement in the alleged leak, hence CSA’s withdrawal of him and its acceptance of the investigation. Part of the arrangement with that investigation was that Mr Lorgat should not even comment on the restructuring of the ICC.
Mr Nenzani said that dealing with the matter needed political skill and tact, since the cricketing scene globally was based on relationships. That was why one needed to be careful about how one dealt with these relationships, because the adverse effects were felt through the FTP.
Mr Lorgat said that when the first proposal was made in early January, cricket globally was in chaos. He and Mr Nenzani had had to juggle with issues so far reaching that he could not relate what the implications would have been for cricket internationally. All the issues CSA had presented on that day were what he and others had fought for while at the ICC. The restructuring proposal had been the exact opposite of all of that.
The Chairperson thanked CSA for the briefing, because the media had projected the restructuring proposal as the CSA having sold out.
Mr MacKenzie reiterated the Chairperson’s perspective and said that it had become so serious that in 2013 there had been a quasi-debate in Parliament over the Indian tour issue. He had gone public that he felt the use of CSA’s CEO as a scapegoat left a very bad taste among cricket followers in SA. The fact that the CEO had to be sidelined over a scurrilous article was a shocking sideshow. How much money was the 35% sliding scale chunk in distribution worth, apart from the test fund?
For Mr MacKenzie that was problematic, as SA was the number one cricketing nation in the world, and SA had the Mandela Legacy which spoke to development of cricket. The restructuring proposal was against cricket development and the very ethos and ethics which SA stood for as a sporting Nation. Who else supported the modified version of the proposal?
The Chairperson intervened and said that CSA could respond to Mr MacKenzie, but should not respond in ways that might compromise CSA.
Mr Nenzani said that CSA was grateful for that understanding, as some of the issues were still in a state of flux.
The Chairperson interrupted Mr Nenzani again, saying that if the issues where still fluid, he should not respond.
Ms Sindane also supported the Chairperson in barring Mr Nenzani from responding.
Mr Nenzani replied that the test funding was different from the ICC distributions to Members. That funding was equal for all those seven countries that were going to benefit from it, which was $10 million a year. The distributions were based on the amounts realized from selling the media rights of the ICC. Currently all countries received an amount of about $52 million after an ICC event. From the media rights sales, 65% was shared equally and the 35% was on a sliding scale. CSA said it had not sold SA out.
The Chairperson thanked CSA again for its responses and the briefing, and also summarised its general interaction with the Committee. The morning session of the meeting was adjourned.
At the resumption of the second session. the Chairperson asked the Committee to introduce itself with its complementary staff again, for the benefit of the South African Football Association (SAFA) and for the SAFA delegation to do likewise. Everyone did as requested.
The Chairperson repeated the brief as set in the agenda and told SAFA to add anything which it felt it wanted to inform the Committee on.
SA Football Association: Briefing and deliberations on 2012/13 SAFA Annual Report, programme of action contained in Vision 2022, and 2013 Africa cup of Nations (see document)
Mr Dennis Mumble, CEO, SAFA, took the Committee through SAFA’s report. SAFA had raised about R30m to R40m to support the implementation of the Technical Master Plan of its Development Agency. It had new electoral, ethics and disciplinary codes respectively.
SAFA Group Annual Financial Statements and Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2013 (see document)
Mr Gronie Hluyo, CFO, SAFA, said SAFA’s financial statements had been presented at SAFA’s AGM. It had recorded a loss because of the general global economic downturn and the bad publicity it had received from the match-fixing scandal.
Mr Hluyo continued with the presentation on the SAFA turnaround strategy for the 2014 financial year (see document).
SAFA Vision 2022
Dr Danny Jordaan, President, SAFA, said that the title of his section of the presentation was based on the fact that Qatar would be holding the Soccer World Cup in 2022. SAFA’s plan was based on the current situation as it had found it, and that was that Spain and England had 12 000 coaches with A-licences respectively, but SA had none. In the last four months, SAFA had trained 73 coaches with an A-licence. The top 100 schools in SA did not play football, and Mr Jordaan said that it was useless to fight at the top end against rugby and cricket. The Portfolio Committee hammered the national coach for lack of transformation, when lack of transformation was created at grassroots, and it should not have been surprising then that there was no transformation in national teams, because that pattern had been established before 1990 and was continuing. If transformation was a serious topic, then the black schools in townships needed to play rugby and cricket as they did before, without being reduced to football schools. It was not natural to pre-determine the sporting choice of a child. For example, in Malaysia, the schools structured the year so that learners played all sports, so that they could choose at the end which sport they wanted to play. The disconnection between DBE and SRSA needed serious attention, as school sport was the only way to address the transformation challenge.
He then took the Committee through the presentation.
It had been quite surprising for him to hear from researchers that an overwhelming majority of SA soccer players had never seen a doctor. SAFA had then resolved to subject all its junior teams to testing their physical status across the board. It had been shown that the most successful teams were where the team had graduates in the majority. The 1995 Springbok team had 13 graduates, for example.
Ms Sindane asked what implications the staff reductions had for SAFA, considering its past performance and its envisioned future. What would happen to the surplus funds, after the cost reduction focus had been complete, so that the Committee could monitor that? What lessons had SAFA taken from being recognized as among the best host compared to Bafana Bafana’s poor showing at the tournament? What were SAFA’s expectations and targets with the legacy fund? Had it accrued interest, as it seemed to have remained the same? What lessons and programs had SAFA learnt and was planning to implement, based on spectator analysis? What could be done from a legislative perspective to assist SAFA in sequestering players from both domestic and international clubs, to perform National duties?
Mr S Mmusi (ANC) recalled that SAFA previously had commented on a bank overdraft that it had to pay back. Had it done so? Why was North West not included in the facilities development programme? Had the match fixing scandal investigation been concluded?
Mr MacKenzie recalled that SAFA had spoken about challenges with the age verification of players. He knew a company that he could recommend that could assist.. Did SAFA get any share from the broadcasting rights sold for the Premier Soccer League (PSL)? Would SAFA keep the money it would receive after getting its new broadcast deal, or would it go towards affiliates around the country to roll out SAFA programmes? What age group would the individuals selected for the new academy be, and what type of education would they be receiving there? Could SAFA comment on the progress made in dealing with challenges in player release for national duty?
Was the commemorative game where Bafana Bafana played with the Springboks, which was a unifying concept outside of sport in the country, something SAFA envisaged going forward? Could SAFA not engage other sporting codes’ academies, so that it could accelerate its targets up until it had completed its own academy? Some of the more traditional sporting schools did play football, it just happened that it was played while the other popular sports were being played, which was probably why it got overshadowed.
Mr Mmusi reminded the Chairperson of his earlier request and asked if it was possible for SAFA, when responding, to start with his questions so that he could recuse himself thereafter.
Ms Dube asked what the contingency plan was for the staff that would be reduced. Even though it was club related, how could SAFA assist players who became permanently injured, so that they did not become burdens to their families?
Dr Jordaan said there had been a typographical error, as there was an academy in the North West, and most of its work in its academies’ project took place there. SAFA had repaid its overdraft. The match fixing scandal had not been dealt with, and in fact this was an issue that plagued over 70 countries globally, and pervaded every sport. At its recent legkotla, SAFA had recognised the problems with school soccer, and it would engage SRSA on how to work with the DBE to get soccer played at schools. Bafana had not been playing with the best of its local talent. SAFA had spent R33 million, which was interest from the legacy fund It was not only SAFA that applied for funding there, as there were four football players that were funded for their postgraduate studies, and SAFA had actually applied for R48 million from the legacy fund, for the 2013/14 financial year.
The spectator analysis related to viewers, but engagement with the football supporting public was the responsibility of provincial associations. There was possibly a need for broader engagement, he conceded. SAFA had an insurance fund for players, but clubs also ended player careers, because of incorrect treatment of injuries. SAFA would certainly engage Mr MacKenzie to see if there was a shared service arrangement it could make with the age verification company he had contact with.
Mr Mumble said that SAFA had reduced its staff complement by 36 persons over a period of 18 months, and the reduction had been through attrition. As people moved jobs, their portfolios would fall away. SAFA employed many other officials on a part-time basis. It did have a broad interaction online with the footballing public, but obviously it was not big enough, as there were only about 80 000 followers on twitter and facebook. That could be improved as well, as there were provincial and regional association structures. The legacy fund granted funding only when an application was accompanied by a comprehensive plan of how the funding would be used. All the money linked to the fund in the presentation went directly into football development, as detailed in the presentation as well. Only about 90 of the 341 local football associations were playing women’s football at junior level, but SAFA was addressing that.
Ms Sindane wanted to know how much the academy in KZN cost? Would that amount be the same for all the academies in the rest of SA?
SAFA replied that it would cost R70 million, but the return on investment for soccer players in particular needed to be discussed. For example, when Jacques Kallis played at the highest level, and earned R5 million a year, the only person that benefited was himself. When Steven Pienaar or Thulani Serero earned £100 000 per week at Ajax Amsterdam, his family and his extended family felt the effects of that. That was why the entire Africa prayed that their children should make it to the top leagues of the world. If SAFA could create a platform that would enable that life changing experience for 100 players playing at the top leagues, that could impact possibly 10 000 people immediately. Dr Jordaan appealed to the Committee that that was something SAFA had to do, because it was also about education as well, not just footballing.
Mr M Mdakane (ANC) commented that historically soccer was popular, but currently it had collapsed. Were the causes of that possibly a failure of leadership in soccer and sport in general? Indeed even the mediocre performance of Bafana was not entirely their fault, but the decay in soccer administration in SA. The real causes of the decay needed to be addressed before turning around soccer. Many of those issues just needed the promotion of good governance in soccer. SAFA could assist legislators by producing diagnostic reports that would tell them the challenges in soccer. There were no sporting facilities in the past, but people played soccer nonetheless, and people would attend local soccer games. Currently, the standard of football was so bad that those very same people now chose to watch European football during PSL matches. He said that it was important to address those issues. Erecting facilities would become unaffordable, as they would be unsustainable without addressing the current challenges first. Ten years down the line, communities would vandalise those facilities because of inaccessibility. He asked what the current SAFA management would want to leave as legacies.
The acting Chairperson said that it was unfortunate that the Chairperson had arrived late, because some of his concerns had already been addressed, and the SAFA package also contained further details on some of the challenges he had pointed out. His concern was with the quota of foreign African players playing club football in the PSL, because the Committee had said that anything sourced from outside the country should be a scarce skill. How did clubs justify their development if it had 50 players, wherefrom it needed to choose only 11 to 14 players per game? It was a waste of good talent. SAFA really had to engage the PSL to sort out their differences, because even the friendlies that were to be played in the near future would be jeopardized if they did not fall under FIFA’s calendar. Hopefully the exposure the Under-17s were getting would naturally progress to senior national caps.
Dr Jordaan conceded that foreign players in the domestic league were a concern and that there probably were two things that adversely affected Bafana Bafana. When SA won the CAF trophy in 2000, there had been a domestic league of 20 teams, with each team having a complement of ten SA players. That had given Clive Barker a pool of 200 players to select from. The league had contracted to 16 teams, where there could be 6 local players and 5 foreign players in each team. Effectively Gordon Igesund had 96 players to choose the national team from. SAFA had also clarified with the PSL that clubs could not count naturalized citizens as indigenous citizens, because those six players must be eligible for national selection. SAFA indeed had to look at that, so that the lines did not get blurred there.
In Europe currently, squad sizes were also being scrutinized, because if a team had a squad of 46, only 11 played, with 36 players on the bench. What was being proposed over there was that every squad should be restricted to 21 players and that if that included players under-21 years, then there would be no limit. Possibly SA also needed to look at this.
Dr Jordaan said that he would really love to talk over the issue of leadership at grassroots level, because apartheid had put everyone in the same location. If one looked, it was evident that teachers were the leaders of sport then. After 1990, restrictions on movement had been removed and while teachers taught in townships, they had relocated to the suburbs. The total effect on sport in all of that, was that sport had declined, and it was apparent that there had been no plan in place to deal with that exodus. It was going to be a challenge, but SAFA was going to have to take whoever had taken leadership there and train them, so that they could provide better leadership.
The Chairperson thanked SAFA and everyone who had been present at the meeting. The meeting was adjourned.
- PC Sport: Cricket SA and SAFA Briefing and Deliberations on Annual Report 1
- PC Sport: Cricket SA: PC Sport: Cricket SA and SAFA Briefing and Deliberations on Annual Report 2
- PC Sport: Cricket SA: Briefing and deliberations on Annual Report, Strategic Plan and development programmes 1
- PC Sport: Cricket SA: Briefing and deliberations on Annual Report, Strategic Plan and development programmes 2
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.