da brwin： Bobbie Refaie, the USACA’s secretary, talks bluntly about the problems facing the board and the poor performance of the team during the World Cup
da casino： 07-Jul-2005Syed “Bobbie” Refaie, the secretary of the USA Cricket Association (USACA), talks candidly to Deb K DasBobbie Refaie is the second-highest ranked active officer in the USACA. We first met ten years ago when, at the finals of the North American Challenge Tournament in Vancouver (B.C.), he took his Southern California team to a thrilling victory over British Columbia, then the all-Canada champions, with a smashing four over midwicket in the last over of the match. So, when I got a personal message asking for a one-on-one interview, I was eager to talk to him.What made the conversation especially interesting to me was that this was the first time an active member of the USACA executive would be speaking on the record and in public about what really went on inside USACA. I was hoping to learn how things really worked inside the USACA leadership, from some one who was in a position to know about such things first hand.My expectations, as it turned out, were fully justified.We began with Refaie’s views on Team USA’s abysmal performance in the Champions Trophy in England. I told him that many US cricketers had serious misgivings about how and why Team USA had performed as badly as it did, and asked him what he thought of it all. Refaie was outspoken about USACA’s mismanagement of the entire tour. He was critical of the choice of Kenny Benjamin as the technical advisor; there were several other world-class and qualified cricketers/coaches who had showed their willingness to help US cricket, who could have been of more assistance to Team USA.He said that the choice of Jamaica on the advice of Benjamin for the practice matches and training camp was a colossal blunder. Had the team proceeded to England instead of Jamaica, USACA would have saved thousand of dollars, since ICC was paying for business-class tickets for all the team members and management to England. It would also have had more time to get used to English conditions, and would have had the squad together from the start instead of having several players injured and stranded in the USA by the Floridahurricanes.Kenny Benjamin, Refaie explained, had turned out to be an unmitigated disaster. He was reported to have used foul language with the team and management; overruled the manager and coaches, was arbitrary and arrogant, and made team selections without consulting anyone. As a result, the side was a thoroughly demoralised group before the Champions Trophy even started, and lacklustre performances were a foregone conclusion.The worst part of it all, said Refaie, was “who made these decisions? ICC, USACA or the West Indies Board?” According to Benjamin, he was hired by the ICC and the treasurer of USACA, and the only person who could ask him any questions was the treasurer, who had given him full authority over the squad. Refaie still wanted to find out if this was true and how these decisions were made by the USACA. Even though he was the secretary of the USACA, he admitted he knew very little about the Jamaica camp, and the appointment of Benjamin as a technical advisor.So why did he put up with this kind of treatment from his fellow executives? His response turned out to be what I had expected. He had believed, until now, that the best interests of US cricket would be served by his playing the “good soldier” and staying in despite all provocations. This might seem like a facile excuse, but I was inclined to believe him on the basis of what I knew to be his character.We turned to some other topics, and Refaie was his usual brusque and candid self. He had been quoted as being the only USACA leader who had wanted to give ProCricket a chance. I asked him whether this was true. He said it was, as long as they submitted a written plan and did not jeopardise USACA’s non-profit tax status. He would still like to see ProCricket or any other organization which wanted to promote cricket in the USA to succeed, but he expressed private reservations about ProCricket and their management being able to pull it off.A particular concern for Refaie was the damage that a failure of ProCricket, by not having proper cricket grounds and getting into possible trouble with the US Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Internal Revenue Service, might do to US cricket in general–meaning, whether future efforts to achieve international standing for US cricketers might be jeopardized by ProCricket’s possible failure.Our final topic was the recent meeting between the International Cricket Council (ICC) and the USACA in London during the Champions Trophy. It had been kept a complete secret by the USACA. There had not been any follow-up reports on the USACA website, and I wanted to know what had happened.Refaie confirmed that the meeting did take place, and it was an important one for USACA. The ICC told USACA that Project USA and Gary Hopkins, its newly-appointed CEO, were to report directly to ICC, and any funds raised by Project USA would go into ICC’s USA Development Fund, not into USACA coffers.The ICC also told USACA that it needed to make drastic improvements to its constitution, operational management and financial accountability– and this had to take place as the first, not the last, order of USACA business.The issue of ProCricket was raised at the meeting, but was brushed aside by the ICC representatives.The meeting, said Refaie, appeared to him to be a good step for US cricket. The USACA could no longer afford to do business as usual. It had been told what it needed to do to restore its credibility, and these requirements were immediate and drastic.On the issue of lack of communication within USACA, Bobby was very candid and forthcoming. He said, “As a Secretary of this organisation, I will be the first to admit that I have no idea why some executives don’t want to answer important questions. [But] I am not responsible for their lack of communication. I am not going to answer or make things up for the sake of communicating.”Refaie affirmed that he was proud to have passed more information and communication to executives than any of his predecessors since he took over as secretary, but added that he did not know why the board members refused to share that information with their respective regions. He believed that the kind of communication USACA really needed was that between its principal officers. However, without it he was not able to report or comment on executive decisions; and this, he admitted, was one of his major shortcomings.Refaie also said he was very disappointed at some of the current regional directors for not doing enough for their areas, and not getting up and asking important questions. He added that he didn’t know why some of them accepted their positions when they had no desire to do the hard work or share important information. They were, he said, only interested in their titles; they would attend meetings only when USACA paid for their tickets, or if they were fighting to get their favourite players selected for the team so as to improve their chances for the next USACA election.Refaie readily agreed that USACA was not a perfectly run organisation and that it needed a clear agenda, short and long term goals, better communication from every executive and board member, and a solid plan to promote cricket at grass-root level. Only then would it be possible take the game to the next level. For the sake of US cricket, said Refaie, some drastic changes were needed.My mind went back to the day when, ten years ago, an upstart Southern California squad took on the best of Canada’s provincial teams in the finals of the North American Challenge Tournament. There, as the shadows lengthened over Sir Donald Bradman’s favourite cricket ground at Stanley Park, a gaggle of cricketers from Hawaii, Seattle and the Bay Area who had already played and lost in the tournament joined a group of curious US tourists to set up a chant: “U-S-A, U-S-A”. Then that miraculous shot past midwicket, and a US team had done the impossible– beaten the best of Canada on their home ground by one wicket in the final over, for the first and perhaps the only time in recent cricket history.Yes, that was Bobbie Refaie. And this too, was Refaie; slightly wider around the middle now, with a few flecks of grey dotting his tousled mane, stepping forward at the eleventh hour to do what he thought was best for US cricket.And, then as well as now, the clock was ticking.
