Tweet
By Sir Hilary Beckles
Story Created: Apr 23, 2012 at 10:51 PM ECT
Story Updated: Apr 23, 2012 at 10:51 PM ECT
Reasoning and writing as a West Indian academic, I believe to my brittle bones that the crisis of West Indies cricket performance is first and foremost a crisis of political governance and intellectual disenchantment. It takes the obvious form of player-employer conflict, and is expressed in public acrimony about the role and legitimacy of the WICB.
Political leaders have rightly been called to participate behind closed doors, and some have commented assertively on the team selection process. But, wearing the hat with which I write, I am not satisfied that we have cooked the cookie.
I believe the smoke generated by the heat has clouded our vision. I believe the steam has blurred our focus and serves as a diversion from the real issue; the crisis of political governance in the West Indies. Meanwhile, the West Indies team, like the boy on the burning deck, continues to falter, its best efforts notwithstanding. "Blame the Board" has become the rallying call, championed by the man roaming the street.
The women running the State have called for an investigation into what seems like black masculinity gone wild. We have all been driven into a Caribbean cul-de-sac; all of us! We have made a monumental mess of our reality; a disturbing diffusion of West Indian intellect and energy is daily wasted.
What is the disturbing reality that resides at the core? It is this. The West Indies is the only nation in Test Cricket that currently finds itself unable to place its best team on the field of play. The nation is under-presented. The young and the bright within our sight are not yet the best, and the team on the field is short on depth of experience.
There is no doubt, say all the experts at Kensington Oval earlier this month, that our defeat was the result of this circumstance. Indeed, I agreed, that the lost opportunity to defeat India at home and abroad on recent tours was due precisely to this cause. Mighty Australia, I also agreed, would crumble on this tour were we to field our best team.
Here is the problem. West Indians are the only Test cricketers in the world who are able to successfully reject their national duty in preference for a bigger personal purse. An Australian official informed me that no Australian player if called to the Test team could refuse national representation and survive with respect in the nation.
The Prime Minister, the media, the private sector, and civic society would find the choice unacceptable; they would describe it a rejection of citizenship; an abandonment of the nation. The same political circumstance no doubt applies to England, South Africa, New Zealand, and Pakistan. Such a player would be divested of house and happiness in India; and maybe a great deal more.
Why the West Indian player? The principal political feature of West Indian society at this time is best described in terms of citizens refusing to accept the right of the State to enforce public discipline in order to safeguard the nationalist agenda. "Citizen versus country" is now the primary conflict; "self versus society
Story Created: Apr 23, 2012 at 10:51 PM ECT
Story Updated: Apr 23, 2012 at 10:51 PM ECT
Reasoning and writing as a West Indian academic, I believe to my brittle bones that the crisis of West Indies cricket performance is first and foremost a crisis of political governance and intellectual disenchantment. It takes the obvious form of player-employer conflict, and is expressed in public acrimony about the role and legitimacy of the WICB.
Political leaders have rightly been called to participate behind closed doors, and some have commented assertively on the team selection process. But, wearing the hat with which I write, I am not satisfied that we have cooked the cookie.
I believe the smoke generated by the heat has clouded our vision. I believe the steam has blurred our focus and serves as a diversion from the real issue; the crisis of political governance in the West Indies. Meanwhile, the West Indies team, like the boy on the burning deck, continues to falter, its best efforts notwithstanding. "Blame the Board" has become the rallying call, championed by the man roaming the street.
The women running the State have called for an investigation into what seems like black masculinity gone wild. We have all been driven into a Caribbean cul-de-sac; all of us! We have made a monumental mess of our reality; a disturbing diffusion of West Indian intellect and energy is daily wasted.
What is the disturbing reality that resides at the core? It is this. The West Indies is the only nation in Test Cricket that currently finds itself unable to place its best team on the field of play. The nation is under-presented. The young and the bright within our sight are not yet the best, and the team on the field is short on depth of experience.
There is no doubt, say all the experts at Kensington Oval earlier this month, that our defeat was the result of this circumstance. Indeed, I agreed, that the lost opportunity to defeat India at home and abroad on recent tours was due precisely to this cause. Mighty Australia, I also agreed, would crumble on this tour were we to field our best team.
Here is the problem. West Indians are the only Test cricketers in the world who are able to successfully reject their national duty in preference for a bigger personal purse. An Australian official informed me that no Australian player if called to the Test team could refuse national representation and survive with respect in the nation.
The Prime Minister, the media, the private sector, and civic society would find the choice unacceptable; they would describe it a rejection of citizenship; an abandonment of the nation. The same political circumstance no doubt applies to England, South Africa, New Zealand, and Pakistan. Such a player would be divested of house and happiness in India; and maybe a great deal more.
Why the West Indian player? The principal political feature of West Indian society at this time is best described in terms of citizens refusing to accept the right of the State to enforce public discipline in order to safeguard the nationalist agenda. "Citizen versus country" is now the primary conflict; "self versus society
Comment