Gentlemen, I have no choice to once again stand up and ask questions regarding the current status in USACA ….I am pretty sure that most of you'll also wish to ask these same questions from the Executives.
Let me start from the beginning, when I was told in the Feb 2000 …that there [was] a tour plan for England and all the trials/tour were sponsored. …I submitted the list of players from my zone and then found out that the trials [were] not sponsored. However …players from some other zones [had] their airline tickets …sponsored…
Then again, in the PHL meeting …we were informed that the trials [were] not paid for, but the tour [was] fully sponsored. [But] The England Tour statement given by Mr. Kamran Khan, in his own handwriting, at the July 29 meeting, showed that the only money he [could] raise …[was] $14,900. Out of these monies, 40% ($5700) was contributed by ONE individual…. What happened [to] those BIG sponsors from PHL, Charlotte or the BIG multinational companies…?
We checked this point out, and came to the conclusion that while there may have been promises made by multinational companies to the USACA to be sponsors, these did not materialize as hoped--or expected. In any case, it is not clear that the term "fully sponsored" refers to specific sponsors, multinational or otherwise--whoever used those words is in the best position to explain what was meant.
Coming down to the English Tour, I saw a lot of e-mails praising the tour and The Management…. If the new 2001 committee seriously thinks that winning 3 out of the 7 games and winning one of these games on the last wicket was a great achievement and a successful tour, then I think we should kiss 2001 ICC Trophy GoodBye!!!!
This may not have been known to Mr. Refaie at the time his original letter was written, but praise for the US Team's performance came from several distinguished sources in England after the tour was completed. Also, CRICINFO'S own examination of the detailed scoresheets showed that nearly half the players in teams opposing the USA either first-class county players or/and were selected for County teams to play the USA---a very high caliber of opposition, making the 3 wins and 4 losses all the more significant. See USA Tour of England , 2000 .
Right after the England Tour, we embarked upon a very important ICC sponsored tour to Canada, finding out that the top players [were] either not eligible or not available. So, we had to go back into the pool of the "Discarded" players from the trials to fill in the gaps in the team. These "Discarded" players were then begged to go to Canada.
Everybody, by now, knows the US cricket team performance in Canada. … What a performance!! …The less said, the better!! …Now, we are putting our faith in the same selectors, same players and the same management to go to the West Indies and compete successfully in the Red Stripe Tournament and face bowlers like Curtly Ambrose, Courtney Walsh and Franklin Rose. Good Luck!!
The facts do indeed support Mr. Refaie on this one. CRICINFO has already covered USA's debacle in the America's Cup (see What happened to the USA?), and Mr. Refaie may have hit upon at least one reason for this performance. As to the Red Stripe, the USA team earned a famous and well-publicised victory over BARBADOS, but lost to Canada and other Red Stripe opponents (see USA at Red Stripe 2000), leaving its overall quality a question-mark.
[At] the meeting in Newark, NJ, we finally got the Minutes and there were some serious issues that were discussed and changes in the Executive committee were made. I was given promises … that I [would] get answers to my questions soon. It's been one month, 17 days, 14 hours, 19 minutes that I am still waiting for my answers. Let me revisit my questions so anybody wants to give answers for these questions can do so.
Actually, it is later than Mr. Refaie estimated--but some answers are in. Read on…
Q1. Who gave the authority to form and register [a] "US Cricket Board"?
We may be missing something here. Is there is no reason why anyone trying to form and register any organization needs anybody's authority than his or her own? I could form and register a "US Cricket Board" all by myself, if I so choose. If there is a copyright or jurisdiction problem, it would be the USACA's prerogative to challenge me--AFTER my "US Cricket Board" was set up, and it could be proved that I was usurping USACA's prerogatives. Or is there something else, going on? Someone should explain.
Q2. [What is] the financial situation of USACA ? ….
See the reply tp this question by the Treasurer of USACA, elsewhere on this page--incidentally,it was written AFTER Mr. Refaie's letter was published-- see Mike Miller's reply to Mr Lesley Lowe.
Q3….. Is USACA getting any revenues from [the] multinational companies [that are running] adverts on our website?? If not, then who is getting the revenues? In the event that these companies are not paying for this excellent service, we should definitely bill them for advertising.
We didn't see any such advertising on the USACA page, but we may have overlooked something--perhaps USACA's Webmaster can explain?
Q4. .. [is] the US Youth program.. part of USACA? As far as I can recollect, Mr. Chico Khan informed the USACA Board in PHL "The best thing that ever happened in the history of US cricket for the last 100 years". However, in the Newark, NJ meeting on July 29, when this question was asked to the President, his reply was that the US youth program is not part of USACA and it is a separate organization.
The two statements quoted by Mr. Refaie do not seem contradictory to us. Does eveything that can be described as " best thing that ever happened in the history of US cricket for the last 100 years", necessarily have to be " part of USACA" ? A cynic might argue that the opposite is true--that the best things in US cricket may have happened outside the USACA, and in spite of it!
I don't have a problem with this PRIVATE organization, as long as certain Directors or Executives of USACA involved with this organization realize that a conflict of interests arises. These Directors and Executives are more than welcome to resign from USACA and concentrate their efforts on this private organization. [Otherwise] it is better that they channel their efforts with the recognized cricket body (USACA) to develop and sustain cricket at all levels in the USA.
We do not see why there has to be a conflict of interest between serving the USACA and promoting an organization which also supports cricket in the USA. Or are we again missing something? Is there something about the USACA that requires people to dissociate themselves from other organizations which also promote US cricket? We would like to know.
Q5. USACA is the only body for the development of cricket in the USA as recognized by the ICC and any funds for the development of cricket in USA has to go thru USACA and any funds from ICC has to be channeled thru USCA and any request to ICC for funds by any PRIVATE organization is absurd. Why did this US Youth Program, a private organization, approach the ICC for funds… ??
If it is indeed true that ICC will only fund US cricket organizations through the USACA, any organization applying directly to it would be referred immediately by ICC to the USACA. The more interesting question is--if the US youth organization did indeed apply to the ICC for funds (something we don't know for sure), why didn't the ICC refer the request to the USACA?
Q6. The last Red Stripe competition in the West Indies, as I remember, it cost the USACA $25,000. Who is paying for the year 2000 trip, [especially] Since our Treasurer very clearly told the Board that we don't have any money…?
Q7. I would like to know the dates of the proposed South Africa Tour by Mr. Khan so I can book my ticket at the same time to visit S.A. and cheer the US Team.
Questions 6 and 7 are clearly best answered by the USACA Officers. No details of arrangements for a USA team visit to South Africa have been made available to CRICINFO-USA.
These are just some initial questions in my mind and you can be rest assured that I have a lot more questions that require clarification. But these can wait and let us try and clear up the above ones first.
Bobby Refaie, Board of Directors, USACA
