Cricket Australia branded as 'arrogant' by review
- Author: Stacy Allen Oct 31, 2018,
Oct 31, 2018, 0:47
The Ethics Centre's 145-page report, a seminal document compiled after CA asked the think tank to conduct a full and frank assessment after the Cape Town cheating scandal, produced 42 recommendations after polling 469 people in the industry.
Players reported feeling treated as commodities. "Just play good, hard, fair cricket and win a few games is all that's required", Vaughan tweeted.
It also wants an Australian Cricket Council configured, with key figures from the sport to meet twice a year to consider "issues of strategic significance" to the sport.
"They'll earn a lot more respect that way than if the ban gets shortened - because, realistically, if the bans get shortened it's like the review said -it's a win-at-all costs mentality". "Rather, it made the fateful mistake of enacting a program that would lead to "winning without counting the costs".
As well as bans for three players, it also hastened the departures of coach Darren Lehmann and CA chief executive James Sutherland.
Pressure was building on Cricket Australia chairman David Peever to resign on Tuesday in the wake of the release of a scathing independent review into the culture of the game. CA has supported both recommendations.
At the same time, the ACA's president Greg Dyer indicated that relationships between the leaders of the two organisation had improved since last year's fractious pay dispute, even though he stated bluntly that much of the players' association's criticisms of CA over recent years had been fully backed up by the findings of Longstaff and McCosker. There is a feeling amongst some State and Territory Associations that they are patronised while sponsors believe their value is defined exclusively in transactional terms.
"An Australian Cricketer walks off the field for being sledged! The ACA's negative assessment of CA is extreme, matched only by the positive assessment offered by the CA Board".
Steven Smith and David Warner.
One Australian player declared "CA do not enjoy being challenged by commercial sponsors, players and other stakeholders". "And the disappointing thing was, when that happened, we didn't play our best cricket".
The review recommends that players penalised for poor on-field behaviour should not be eligible as recipients for major awards.
"Some respondents recognise that one person's "bullying" may be another's "tough negotiations". Respondents say that the focus on outcomes does not extend to a critical examination of the means by which those outcomes are achieved.
Mr Dyer stopped short of calling for Mr Peever to resign in light of damning review findings about CA culture, noting it was a question for state associations, but highlighted the fact he had "some concerns about some of the rhetoric that was used throughout the course of yesterday".
In the words of the review, CA failed to "anticipate and correct for a potential lack of balance - and ethical restraint - in the application of the Argus "blueprint".
"The central theme of the report is that we implemented the high-performance plan according to the review diligently".