When then whose fault is it? Surely you want your best players to play for the side and you do everything you can (within reason) to get them. If ZC offered too much, that's ZCs fault. It shouldn't always come back to BT and Jarvis though because without them, we would have lost some really terrible games.TapsC wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2020 5:51 am
Let me put it this way. I don't believe everything is their fault like you do. There are places I think they did ok. I don't see the likes of Chingoka sacrificing to bring back Jarvis and Taylor for that kind of money or hosting the qualifier (unlike the world cup the qualifier didn't bring much money in). I don't know if they would have pulled off the ZAMCO deal. They fired Esther Lupepe who has hands were dirty. The level of incompetence between 2005 and 2014 was shocking. It could have been far worse. That's how I look at it.
Change will come by understanding the election process, who votes and what they want. You will remember Mukuhlani pulled off a spectacular coup to get there in the first with his challenge only coming in the morning and catching Manase off guard. If you want change you first have to identify a board member who can be a transitional proxy. Identify more board members who you can turn. A lot of them don't care much about who is in charge.
Rainsford would have been the perfect inside man but he acted without thinking it through. It doesn't matter who the chairman is. Most board chairmen are not cricket people. What you need
Is a competent MD and FD and coaching staff. So a proxy chairman can work.
Nobody seems to want to challenge them outright so I guess it can only be from the inside.
We have dropped in the rankings. Have no domestic comp or money. We are losing players (need I remind you that of those making an impact at the moment in international comps) at an alarming rate. We are not giving players that should be given a chance a go. We are an after thought to the rest of the cricketing world, when once we were a emerging force causing serious problems. How much worse do you want it to get before it's accepted to be bad?
So effectively what you are saying, is buy off those who make the votes and you effect change.