By John L. Aaron
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act – George Orwell

The 2011 USACA national elections will be held in March 2011. The 2011 USACA national elections will be held no later than November 30, 2011. The 2011 USACA national elections will be held on October 15, 2011. The 2011 USCA national elections will be held the first week in November 2011. The 2011 USACA national elections will be held on December 19, 2011. The 2011 USCA national elections will be held on March 17, 2012.  The 2011 USCA national elections will now be held on April 14, 2012.  Did I skip over into 2012?  If so, please accept my apologies. All of the preceding scheduled dates are known to be true statements issued in one official form or another by USACA and/or its President, Gladstone Dainty. But can they all be true, if they all pertain to the same thing; the constitutionally required 2011 USACA national elections?

Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year’s Eve, St. Patrick’s Day and Easter, are all holiday celebrations that are noteworthy moments of fun and frolic for many, each with its own significance. Halloween involves Trick or Treating by children (and some adults), costumes, masks and general pranksterisms, Thanksgiving is an occasion for being grateful for all that we have, and as usual Christmas is a time to spread good cheer and glad tidings amongst Christians. The New Year celebrations bring a sense of hope, resolutions, and an eternal spring of prosperity. Then there is St. Patrick’s Day coming up on March 17th, a day welcomed by more than just the Irish, as the air of a fresh spring dawns upon us after winter, and the advent of Easter; a celebration of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The aforementioned dates and holidays span the period of time the American cricket stakeholders have been stretched awaiting a prolonged Compliance review process and elections.

Are there any similarities between the holidays mentioned and the USACA compliance review process and the organization’s national elections, now slated for April 14, 2012?  Well there might be; Halloween is the holiday for tricking and not necessarily treating, Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ and the delivery of goodies by the jolly fat fellow, and exactly 100 years ago in the early morning hours of April 15 – the Titanic sinking off the coast of Newfoundland.

It was a known fact since March 2008 when the current USACA board was elected, that the next USACA national elections would be held three years later, in March 2011. That would be at least one thousand and ninety-five days after the last ballots were counted in 2008. Why then did the current USACA administration give its members so many conflicting promissory dates? Is it the honorable thing to do or is it a hoax with an agenda that quickly unfurled itself, seriously challenging the Rocky Horror Show, for Best Comedy Show of the year, or the truth behind the jolly fat fellow, or the legendary myth that the Titanic was unsinkable? Sorry Louise, there is no Santa Claus, the Titanic was sinkable, and USACA elections are coming. Really? Maybe.

The Compliance Review Process
According to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, the word compliance in part means, 1. a: the act or process of complying to a desire, demand, proposal, or regimen or to coercion. b: conformity in fulfilling official requirements.

Which of the foregoing nouns or verbs apply to the current compliance request(s)? Again, you be the judge.

The USACA national elections were scheduled against the backdrop of a compliance process, that many believe was manipulated and used to perpetuate an agenda that is afoul of the majority of USACA leagues led by hard-working honest volunteers, passionate about a sport and no doubt wanting the sport of cricket to take root in the USA. Such member leagues and volunteers I am sure are 100% in favor of a compliance process that’s fair, transparent, and honest in its deliberations. However, the USACA leadership, or at least those still usurping the power of their office past the deadline and claiming to have the organization’s best interests at heart, has to be honest with themselves first before asking the leagues to do the honorable thing and abide with the results of the compliance process and the compliant and non-compliant league listing that emerged; a production of Robert Chance, Esq., and a ideologically divided USACA board, a process that was clearly based on inconsistencies, favoritism, and conflicts of interest.

To be compliant is to exhibit honor in an environment which has a common goal, such as the USACA cricket community, however, such compliance must be governed by a set of guidelines applicable to all participants, and that clearly determines compliance or non-compliance. The USACA compliance process was incongruent with the organization’s Constitution, and clearly set the stage for subjective interpretation by the deciders, especially in regard to the three additional leagues added by the USACA board to the original compliant list of 12 leagues recommended by attorney Robert Chance.

One must ask the question, how can members of a board who may be seeking re-election themselves, decide on which leagues are eligible to vote and which are not, when clearly a transparent system was not in place? Is it a conflict of interest? You be the judge.

HONOR
In any given modern democracy, honor is a trait not unfamiliar to those practicing the truth, except when practiced among those with a hidden common agenda, and then the truth becomes inconsequential to reality, as in honor that’s not found among thieves.

The honorable thing by any organization that manages volunteer sub-set groups is to seek ways to motivate, encourage and acknowledge compliance by such groups over a period of time whereby the opportunity is given to be compliant within the established guidelines, and clearly understood by all. In the case of USACA’s recent effort to determine which member leagues are compliant and which are not, it is now clear who was conducting and determining the outcome of the compliance process. The communication surrounding the process was as confusing as the proposed electoral process and dates were discouraging.

First the law firm of Robert Chance was selected by an individual or individuals on the USACA board and certainly not by the board in a meeting. That process started the distrust and skepticism among some members of the board and ultimately the member leagues. Not exactly a transparent backdrop, especially where sensitive information was being solicited. To add to the confusion, Robert Chance, the attorney in charge of collecting the compliance data said that he would make recommendations to the USACA board on each of the responding leagues. It is still not clear if his conclusions for recommending or not recommending leagues would be made public. It would be interesting to see his and the board’s reasons behind the punitive action of denying more than two-thirds of the USACA membership the right to exercise their fundamental right to vote on April 14, 2012.

At a teleconference of the USACA executive members and Mr. Chance late last year, President Dainty clearly stated that any compliance response by the leagues was optional and was in no way connected to the upcoming elections, or the right to vote, a point he reiterated over and over again. Understandably so, it was assumed that the organization’s president was being honorable in his directions, although he was reluctant to articulate such a position to the USACA membership at-large. We now know that promise was far from the truth, as the compliance review process quickly became an apparent hidden political tool with an obvious agenda.

For many of the USACA member leagues the information contained in the compliance request may very well have been a foreign language, since most of the leagues are involved in recreational cricket and are structured simply on a not-for-profit basis, albeit not registered as such. Many of the leagues involved in cricket tournaments barely make ends meet to accommodate the annual cricket tournaments involving the weekend-warrior teams participating. Many of them are subsidized by patrons of the sport who enjoy the game. None the less, every USACA league should have completed the Compliance Review process to the best of their abilities. It was an important first step in a fully-compliant organization. It was the honorable thing to do, by all involved. It certainly would have caused the “virtual/phantom” leagues to scatter like cockroaches when the light in the room was turned on. According to many, it certainly was not turned on in 2008.

HOAX
According to Merriman-Webster the word hoax means; to trick into believing or accepting as genuine, something false and often preposterous. Ironically, it is believed to be derived from the word hocus, as in hocus pocus – another Halloween staple?  Regardless, the word may also be used to describe bamboozle, con, dupe, fool, deceive, hoodwink, misguide, misinform, mislead, snow, sucker, or simply trick. Any of the preceding synonyms may have been used to describe the outcome of the USACA compliance review process. Why?

A diluted USCA board met on October 22, 2011 and adopted after the fact; the law firm of Robert Chance to complete the compliance review process. A belated action, that’s not without precedent by USACA. Suddenly the Compliance Review process emerged as the benchmark for eligibility of voting in the USACA national elections. Whew! What happened here? Were the member leagues hoodwinked, mislead, suckered, deceived, duped, conned, bamboozled, fooled, or simply misinformed deliberately, creating a sense of complacency, before forcing a compliance review process and an ever-shifting of the electoral timeline; one fraught with confusion and conflicting dates between November 30, 2011 and now April 14, 2012.

Where is the honor? Where is the transparency? Where is the integrity? Where is the truth?

If only USACA would have put some serious thought into the whole compliance process, it may very well have been a best-seller with the leagues. Most leagues only bought it because it was on the compulsory reading list mandated by USACA, and the text to be used as part of the final exam.

When one considers the sudden self-righteousness of USACA, one must question why the organization did not have the visionary leadership to use the intervening three-year period to encourage, motivate and seek compliance from its member leagues, more so against allegations of several “virtual/phantom” leagues voting in the last election. Ironically, one board member who delivered several proxy votes to the last election has since claimed some of those leagues were then non-compliant under the USACA constitutional compliance guidelines. One has to wonder why admit the wrong-doing and conspiratorial action now?

HORROR SHOW
The upcoming USACA elections are now being billed as the next Rocky Horror Show, primarily by the conflicting Compliance Review process and the open-ended arrangements published this week on the USACA web site.

With the national elections originally scheduled for three years after March 2008, with USACA on a constitutional technicality extending it to November 30, 2011, who would have thought the national elections (without the completion of constitutional regional elections) would now be scheduled for April 14, 2012, almost 13 months later. However, it will be exactly 100 years to the day after the Titanic sank at 2:27AM on the morning of April 15, 1912.

Before you start drawing any conclusions, history is very unlikely to repeat itself here, without someone removing the ballast water tanks from the hull of the behemoth that is USACA. It may require divine intervention. Whether you are Muslin, Hindu, Christian, Mormon, or an atheist, your basic faith should drive you to believe that the big dark stone blocking the entrance to the growth of cricket in this country, will be rolled away eventually and a perpetual light will shine upon the sport, after so many years of hoax, horror and very few, if any, honorable men still claiming to be standing on the self-righteous side of poor governance of the sport by USACA.

Look for the USACA board to hurriedly arrange regional elections from among the 15 leagues identified as being in compliance; and as a continuation of the travesty of justice doled out on so many, by so few, to acquire total station domination of the sport in this country.

 

12 Comments

  1. Sham Ali says:

    Well, Well, Well, somebody give this Williams a good cut-ass because the tongue lashing he got from the learned professor Sam Soopersaud may not be enough for his sickening attempt to berate the facts in John Aaron’s article.
    Mr. Williams, the discussion of intellectual history is neither appropriate nor warranted. Occasionally, it is a practice by a few like you who purported to be intellectuals to parade with sweeping statements for their self aggrandizement – let alone referencing Voltaire. Have you read Voltaire SIR!? That which you attempted to preach is quite irrelevant to his philosophy of thought, and as such you portray yourself as one who is self-absorbed, intellectually impotent and blinded by his own narcissism – Executive Secretary?
    Hiding behind philosophical rhetoric is an excuse for your limited perspective and an ‘academic’ way of saying that you have nothing to offer . Continue ripping off the Wikipedia page. The next time you are on WIKI check intellectual property rights; you will see something on plagiarism. Clearly, Mr. Williams is engaging in Peacockery PUFFING himself up for Executive Secretary. Given some power, we may have a Hitler-like governance – intellectual History. Whew!

  2. Mark Demos says:

    Sam, I was in no way agreeing with Mr Williams. I suggested he could be likened to a boil on Dainty’s backside. Rather unfortunate place to have to make a statement from. I think John’s article was excelllent and I support wholesale change in USACA.

  3. Mr Williams, plagiarism is unethical for a writer. More so, it points to the ineffectiveness of that writer, and his intention to portray himself as presenting materials that emanates from his own cranial capacity. in the case above, Sir, you have quoted from another source without giving a bibliography as to your source. That makes you a plagiarist. Sorry that I have to be so frank.

    As a retired educator who has lectured in the English Language Arts/Communication Field, I find it very “unsettling” when I come across a plagiarist.

  4. Wiki Pedia says:

    Click on the link below to find out where the esteemed ‘nominated’ secretary lifted the language contained in his comment:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_history#Intellectual_historiography

    “Intellectual history as a self-conscious discipline is a relatively recent phenomenon. It has precedents, however, in the history of philosophy, the history of ideas, and in cultural history as practiced since Burckhardt or indeed since Voltaire. The history of the human mind, as it was called in the eighteenth century, was of great concern to scholars and philosophers, and their efforts can in part be traced to Francis Bacon’s call for what he termed a literary history in his The Advancement of Learning. However, the discipline of intellectual history as it is now understood emerged only in the immediate postwar period, in its earlier incarnation as “the history of ideas” under the leadership of Arthur Lovejoy, the founder of the Journal of the History of Ideas. Since that time, Lovejoy’s formulation of “unit-ideas” has been discredited and replaced by more nuanced and more historically sensitive accounts of intellectual activity, and this shift is reflected in the replacement of the phrase history of ideas by intellectual history.

    In the United Kingdom, the history of political thought has been a particular focus since the late 1960s and is associated especially with the Faculty of History at the University of Cambridge, where until recently such scholars as John Dunn and Quentin Skinner studied European political thought in its historical context, emphasizing the emergence and development of such concepts as the state and freedom. Skinner in particular is renowned for his provocative methodological essays, which were and are widely read by philosophers and practitioners of other humanistic disciplines, and did much to give prominence to the practice of intellectual history. The University of Sussex in the UK has also achieved a reputation in this field of study, and the Sussex emphasis on broad interdisciplinary study has been particularly useful in relevant teaching and research.

    In the United States, intellectual history is understood more broadly to encompass many different forms of intellectual output, not just the history of political ideas, and it includes such fields as the history of historical thought, associated especially with Anthony Grafton of Princeton University and J.G.A. Pocock of Johns Hopkins University. Despite the prominence of early modern intellectual historians (those studying the age from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment), the intellectual history of the modern period has also been the locus of intense and creative output on both sides of the Atlantic. Prominent examples of such work include Louis Menand’s The Metaphysical Club and Martin Jay’s The Dialectical Imagination.

    In continental Europe, equivalents of intellectual history can be found. An example is Reinhart Koselleck’s Begriffsgeschichte (history of concepts), though there are methodological differences between the work of Koselleck and his followers and the work of Anglo-American intellectual historians.”

  5. What kind of a mandate would it be for elected officials to be (s)elected by less than 33% of the total electorates, who were handpicked? A farce of an election on April 14th.
    I feel it would be an insult for any honest person to aprticipate in this travesty, called an election. The people at USACA has done harm to the game that would take decades to undo. Their handpicked leagues would put them back into power, and they would continue to plunder.

    John AAron has written an excellent piece worthy of literary acclaim. Kenwyn Williams has made an attempt to match intellectualism with intellectualism, but has come in a second. John likened the changing dates for the election with several holidays. How appropriate. The guys at USACA seem to be on a perpetual holiday.

    Even the present nonperforming bunch is voted out of office, it would still be a ‘”non-election”, not to mention undemocratic.

    Mr. Demos, you seem to feel that Kenwyn has the capacity to “give hell to the hell raisers at USACA”. But if you have been reading his missives all along you would have realized that he supports the “raping” of the USACA constitution by the folks at USACA. Why would you think that he would become a conscience at USACA! Nothing makes sense at this time.

    John, you have been a breadth of fresh air on the USACA Board. I do not know whether you are a candidate for the Secretary slot. If you are not, then, may God help us in our endeavor to build an able national cricket body. But, again, if you do not seek that office, you would still present a breadth of fresh air as you would demonstrate that “you could not be bought”.

    I am thoroughly disgusted with what’s going on and would try to stay “far away” from even mentioning the USACA organization in my future writings.

    “Where ignorance is bliss, its a folly to be wise”

  6. John L. Aaron says:

    Mr. Williams, I refuse to spend my valuable time schooling you, or doing your research. Nor, do I intend to waste any further time engaging you in any pseudo intellectual banter. I suggest you read the USACA Constitution regarding elections following the adoption of that document in 2008.

    With regard to extending and overstaying one’s welcome on the USACA board, I suggest you look beyond me, and to your current sponsor(s) – the incumbents on the USACA Board of Directors. And you are a candidate for Secretary of USACA? What a joke. I noticed you have been advised to run for USACA Secretary, instead of President. Did you get bumped down on the list of candidates? Obviously, your sponsor(s) must have thought you were not presidential material. What a shame, after so many months of you campaigning for that position.

    There is a saying: Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience. I applaud your experience in this regard. You win!

  7. Mark Demos says:

    Great article Mr Aaron. You are a man of integrity, honour and have stated your case clearly. The corrupt nature and behavior of USACA is all and more of what you have written. Those who believe they can climb into this rotting corpse or heal what is a group of corrupt fools is as big a fool than they are. Those who seek to reform and not oust the current board are kidding themselves.
    Well done Mr Aaron for having the courage to state the realities as they exist an for the stand you take in the face of fools. To have to tolerate that sort of nonsense makes you a bigger man that I.

    Mark Demos

  8. Mark Demos says:

    Mr Willimas fancies himself as an intellectual. His attempt to respond in language that 3% of the readers of this or any blog could read, would cerrtainly qualify for the position he seeks. May he become a boil on the backside of Galdstone Mugabe Dainty and may he wax eloquet or flatulent on that board of thugs, waterboys, criminals and corrupt fools.

    Regards

    Dumb African/Greek/Scotsman

  9. The temperature of my response served its purpose. Your missives serve only to confuse the cricketing community. I personally take offence to that sort of language intemperance. Keep it simple, fact based and straight forward.

    We can move back and forth and as you are well aware I always win at these sort of pseudo intellectual banters. Quickly however, I do recall somewhere in the USACA Constitution that your term of 3 years ended in March 2011. As we all know, you have a schemingly and convenient history of extending deadlines, especially when they seem to benefit you. The length of the constitutional breach is unlawful even for but a second; by your own admission you “independently chose … to abuse the privilege and honor bestowed upon [you] by the league presidents of US cricket, by staying beyond [your] elected term of office (which ended in March 2011).

    Instead of trying to explain away the indescretions of a board that you were part of for more that 3 years why not use this forum to explain how on earth Krish and Rudy could not have the leagues in compliance? How do you explain it to your club members? Reality check, 15 leagues made it through.

    These men will choose the next board of USACA. Hopefully I can be part of that board so I can clean up the mess that you and your brotherhood created starting from March 2008.

    Kenwyn S. Williams
    Nominated Executive Secretary of USACA

  10. Hugh Pitter says:

    Well said John. The truth hurts. Your statements and facts about USACA is right on target. Nothing was done as per the constitution by USACA. It”s Dainty’s law.I think US.Cricket is facing a 3rd ICC suspension. It’s a very dark day for Cricket in the USA.

  11. John L. Aaron says:

    Mr. Williams, I was reluctant to respond to your insipid comments here, but your effort at seeking to present yourself as a literary intellectual and history buff intrigued me. Unfortunately, your initial comments and quotations have no bearing whatsoever on the content of the article. Your comment, “…that fall within an administrative jurisdiction is weightless,” is insulting to the intelligence of all independent thinking cricket stakeholders in this country.

    Your audacity to make frivolous the travesty of justice that’s being perpetrated on 30+ membership entities of USACA by characterizing it as “weightless,” is indicative of your ignorance of the facts and your unwillingness to see beyond your own self-aggrandizement and wishful agenda. Your desire to overlook a compliance process that at best is considered biased by more intellectual minds than mine, reflects on your inability to handle the truth and to be truthful, two traits necessary to be an honest, transparent, and effective Executive Secretary of a national not-for-profit organization.

    My so-called biased pen reflects the honesty and integrity of the many cricket stakeholders you now seek to malign with your unkind and insulting remarks, aimed at promoting yourself as a candidate for USACA office.
    Mr. Williams, how can a healing process begin, when the wound of injustice perpetrated on so many by so few, was recently made deeper and wider by a compliance and proposed electoral process designed to produce a bias and predictable outcome.

    Finally, for the record and your poor recollection, I resigned as Executive Secretary of USACA when the term of office for which I was duly elected came to a constitutional end – November 30, 2011. I independently chose not to abuse the privilege and honor bestowed upon me by the league presidents of US cricket, by staying beyond my elected term of office. I hope you can match that level of integrity and honesty.

  12. Intellectual history as a self-conscious discipline is a relatively recent phenomenon. It has precedents, however, in the history of philosophy, the history of ideas, and in cultural history as practiced since Burckhardt or indeed since Voltaire. The history of the human mind, as it was called in the eighteenth century, was of great concern to scholars and philosophers, and their efforts can in part be traced to Francis Bacon’s call for what he termed a literary history in his The Advancement of Learning. However, the discipline of intellectual history as it is now understood emerged only in the immediate postwar period, in its earlier incarnation as “the history of ideas” under the leadership of Arthur Lovejoy, the founder of the Journal of the History of Ideas. Since that time, Lovejoy’s formulation of “unit-ideas” has been discredited and replaced by more nuanced and more historically sensitive accounts of intellectual activity, and this shift is reflected in the replacement of the phrase history of ideas by intellectual history.

    I make this point as a precursor to my comment on the above only to point out that reliance on “current” situations, especially those that fall within an administrative jurisdiction is weightless when we try to intellectualize them with historical events. The issues that are resounded versed above are all relative and of course written by an incredulously biased pen.

    We should ALL become active and make sure the regions begin the healing process that is necessary for USA Cricket to progress. Follow my route. From nowhere to halfway to nowhere. I could be potentially have a seat on the board of USA Cricket. Everyone should get involved and seek change.

    Today I accepted the nomination for Executive Secretary of USACA, to fill a vacant position resigned by Mr. Aaron. Follow my campaign to election day: