HOME PAGE | FACTFILES | QUOTES | COMMENT FORM |
First, a word of comfort. The Bastable/Stuart-King offering runs to 30 pages. Because so much of that is repetition, we shall not require anything like that. Stay with us.
The first version of the Renaissance foreword is a curious read. It started with "we have stated repeatedly" and had the same first three lines in paragraph one and three. "Stating repeatedly" is all very well, but there is a limit! In fact, those two paragraphs were almost identical. We note though that on Friday the document was amended to remove this repetition - feedback from their readers, we assume!
It is refreshing to hear that you, the members, "have a right to the facts" and "a right to be informed." This makes a welcome change. All the more surprising then, that they attempted to suspend two of us a week before the AGM, intending to prevent us from speaking there. Their carelessness meant they failed in that, but it is out of character with this newly declared love of debate and free speech. And mostly, they stayed away from it themselves. It would be handy to have people there to present their reports but, there you go. They obviously had more important things to do.
Their love of facts does not stop them reiterating the tired accusation of problems arising from an assault on the reputation of ACU&S, rather than the grave financial damage Stuart-King and his Cuckoo Cabinet inflicted on it. This crops up in several places despite having been dismissed by the report of the Committee of Enquiry chaired by Colin Pearson.
In the preamble, we find the first of several errors, if we disregard the omission of the word 'of' from 'their' logo on the front cover, a logo which bears remarkable similarity to that of ACU&S, apart from the colour. So much for respecting copyright! Will sponsors be impressed by that? Then, in a careless transcription from the MCC website, they state that the Test and County Cricket Board and the National Cricket Association ran professional and amateur cricket from "just after the beginning of the twentieth century." No marks for that, we fear, as this is sixty or so years wrong, the TCCB having been set up in 1968.
It is odd, perhaps, to find that a group who just two months ago reported ACU&S as having £172,000 in subscriptions "with more to come" but later had to admit that this was a total income figure, is so well informed about other people's finances that they can state categorically that "ECB does not have the resources to discharge even its current responsibilities, let alone take on.....new ones." Once again, they are wrong. ECB has, and it will, assisted in this by the very sponsorship which, had the Cuckoo Cabinet supported Dave Burden's chairmanship instead of determinedly working to undermine it, could have been the salvation of ACU&S.
Next they criticise ECB for it not having previously trained and examined umpires and scorers. How they would have squealed had ECB tried to do so! It has only now taken such an interest because ACU&S has been nearly bankrupted by the brainless folly of Stuart-King and his acolytes. Hardly a reason for them to complain, surely?
In The events of the last year or so.... the findings of what may be called the 'Pearson' Report are again denied. This is all the more strange since, even if the rest of the Cuckoo Cabinet have not read that report, one imagines that Mr Ken Say and Mr John Fielden have done so, because both were members of the Enquiry Committee. Moreover, they signed the report without a word of dissent. It is a shame that they could not have been consulted before Mr Bastable again made himself look silly through faulty research. As before, there is no reference to financial blunders.
Why we started speaks of "a group of committed officers." (It is a lovely thought - if only!) Here at last they refer to "lack of funds" - why would that have been, then? - and a complete lack of leadership since March 2005. That was when Dave Burden was democratically elected as chairman replacing Mr Stuart-King. The latter then had room made for him on the Media and Marketing Board when Jim Danks found it necessary to resign immediately as chairman of that body for Stuart-King to take over. It was not much of a surprise when Dave Burden found that he could not write in "How's That? and an attempt to post a website statement to members about the financial mess was removed after only three days. His repeated assertion that he needed proper financial information - consistently denied him - before he could say where ACU&S was going, was described then as "lack of leadership," and mindlessly they continue to do so.
As for ECB's "sudden interest," as we just said, this has been prompted by the recognition that the General Council has been totally incompetent to the degree that ACU&S' existence was, and remains, in question. Damned for being interested, damned ECB would certainly have been had it taken no notice of the shambles. The Cuckoo Cabinet, once again, want to have it both ways.
You may be startled to read that an editorial in "How's That? " recently contained this: "Umpires very often don't even know the names of the teams taking part," until you recall that this would have been written either by Della Rebours or Tony Bastable. How would umpires find their way to the ground, one wonders? "We might call this outlook one of professional disinterest and it must be cherished, for it is the quality that sets umpires apart." Indeed, indeed. We might also call it something else entirely. Earlier on, Mr Bastable wrote of non-sequiturs and red herrings. If you want those you need look no further than Ms Rebours' latest editorial, not forgetting most of her earlier ones.
Section 4, The survival of ACU&S etc is unexpectedly honest enough to admit that, under the control of the Cuckoo Cabinet, ACU&S had been utterly unbusinesslike. It is impossible to disagree with this long awaited confession. Too bad they did not turn up to make it at the AGM on March 25th. However, now follows as big a non sequitur as you could encounter in many months of brisk marching. Through changing just one letter in the title of the organisation, this barmy band will become, as ICUS, able to act "in a professional and businesslike way." This really is a blue whale of a red herring. As some have said often, there is hardly one person there able to run a bath. Strings of nouns and adjectives, hyphenated or otherwise, will not do the trick.
It is not clear that The advantages of being an Institute... are as Mr Bastable states.What is also unclear is how evidence of the need for such an institute will have been properly demonstrated to the Secretary of State. Nor that the field is not already covered by existing bodies. Evidence is required of support from 'other representative and independent bodies'. Who might they have been? Time, perhaps, will tell.
(What else, we wonder, may have gone through their minds when they wrote the rest of this epic? The following might have been how some of the discussion went.....)
How will it be governed? How indeed? One thing is certain. It will be not be by you lot. None of you can be trusted. You might ask awkward questions. Leave it to the experts. People like the Finance Boa.....er....Chris Ra.....er....Dave Bran...er...Barri...
dammit! Leave it to us. We know how to do it.
Differences from, and similarities with, the ACU&S.... well, for a start, you will never have to vote or attend a meeting ever again. Only we, the directors, will have a vote and they will be our meetings, not yours. Plus, we can do away with all that tedious stuff of sending you annual accounts. They will be our business. If you really insist on seeing them you can pay Companies House for the privilege, like everyone else. Obviously, they will be well out of date by the time they have been filed and you get a chance to see them. Move on, that's what we say. What's more, if we decide we ought to be paid, like real directors are, that will be our business too. In fact, it could be the main reason for the business. Still, you can come to the annual dinner if you want. You will have to pay, of course. We are not a charity, you know.
Who will run ICUS? Stupid question. We will, you daft bunch. None of you are up to it.
The structure of the Institute. We are going to have a great structure. One thing we can do - one of very few things in point of fact - is to draw plans and charts and think up amazing schemes. In due course, Regional Directors, all fourteen, will receive an annual or monthly honorarium. We think so, anyway. Depends on sponsorship but, as you know, we are pretty good at that.
Examinations, grading, membership, international members, fellows, jolly good fellows, space launch.....hang on. All right. No space launches. Yet.
SUMMARY: What ICUS offers ACU&S... The same again, but better. Trust us. We shall take over the whole shooting match, office, staff, leases, whatever. We can afford it. Trust us. If it was not going to happen would I and my colleagues....er....forget that quote. We've moved on. (Try that one next time you have a speeding ticket or parking fine. Sorry, I've moved on. See how it works for you) . Yes. Bigger and better. Trust us. We've got experience.
Appendix 1: ICUS Regions Today, Wessex. Tomorrow, the World!
Appendix 2: Barrie Stuart-King. (Do we have to mention him? Sssshhh! No, I mean, won't that put people off? Shut up! But, we've all been trying to distance ourselves.... Will you just keep quiet!! No, but... I said, shut your face right now!!! We are going to look all innocent and tell them that he has been badly misjudged. They won't swallow that, will they? We are going to say that he's in ICUS, but not really in ICUS. And that he has got this special expertise with sponsors and sponsorship. I love your sense of humour. You're marvellous. I couldn't tell you weren't joking....oh, you weren't joking?)
Barrie has already been able to set up successful meetings..... Stop giggling, I'm trying to do a serious job here.
On a different note, a scrabble enthusiast sent us some anagrams, such as people play around with using politicians' names. He or she came up with these for Barrie Stuart-King. We were amazed at how very apt they seem.