As the working group set up by the KNCB to develop the idea of a club charter scheme starts its deliberations, it’s perhaps worth considering what the benefits of such a system might be, and what the pitfalls are.
From all accounts, the proposal tabled by the Board at a meeting of the leading clubs back in November was greeted with universal horror. Part of the reason for this, I think, was the cack-handed way in which the matter had been handled since the idea was accepted in principle in the spring: there was no consultation whatsoever with the clubs, who were confronted, after a long delay, with a scheme into which they felt they had had no input.
Nor were the terms of the proposal deeply attractive. Aimed solely at the clubs in the top divisions, it appeared to rely more heavily on the stick than the carrot, with the prospect of competition points being docked if a club did not achieve the development targets which were set for it. It seems that the details were to some degree misinterpreted, but the reaction of the club representatives was so unequivocal that they appear to have been in no mood to attend to subtleties.
Bouncing the idea back to the clubs was a clever move, but it can only work if everyone involved manifestly has much more to gain from the charter than they stand to lose. And that means that the clubs have to feel that it’s their scheme, designed to help them become bigger, stronger, and more successful.
It is, I believe, fundamental that the charter should be a public recognition from the KNCB that a club is performing at a better-than-satisfactory level across a wide range of criteria, and that that recognition should be available in principle to every club in the country.
Since there are huge differences between the largest Dutch clubs and the smallest, it follows that there should be different levels of charter award – I would suggest three – with the possibility of progression from the lowest to the highest. Indeed, such progression over time should be an expectation.
What would it all be for? Cricket is, as we all keep acknowledging, a marginal sport in The Netherlands, and a threatened one. The infrastructure is precarious: there are not enough players in any sector of the game, and much more needs to be done to build up numbers and raise cricket’s profile. Much of that must inevitably be done by the clubs.
But as well as conferring recognition, a charter scheme needs to represent a kind of contract between the Bond and its member clubs: in setting these goals, the KNCB should be saying, we promise to give you the support you need in a variety of ways, from helping you produce a development plan, through the provision of promotional material to the organisation of courses for coaches, umpires, groundsmen, scorers and so on.
Some of this is already happening, and all a charter system would do would be to integrate these efforts and provide a way of co-ordinating and measuring them. The scheme should be flexible enough to allow each club to find its own path to a better future, but demanding enough to give it every incentive to follow that path.
In the end, it will not be possible to avoid the issue of sanctions. But it’s vital that before that discussion takes place, there’s broad agreement on how a charter system is in everybody’s best interests, and how it can best ensure a healthy and growing cricket community.
As a contribution to that discussion, let me try to set out an ideal, a picture of the kind of club that we would, I am sure, all like to belong to. If we see this as the long-term goal, then the question becomes: how can a charter scheme reflect these ideals, and support our efforts to realise them?
So here goes:
The ideal cricket club
• has a clear organisational structure with well-defined areas of responsibility
• has a Strategic Plan with a horizon of at least three years and measurable intermediate targets
• has a sufficient body of volunteers to achieve its aims and objectives
• has sufficient appropriate grounds for the levels at which it plays, with some room for expansion
• enjoys a constructive working relationship with its local authority, ensuring that the grounds (including the pitches) are maintained in a suitable manner for cricket
• has the necessary peripheral facilities (pavilion/changing rooms, scoreboard, sightscreens, practice facilities)
• has an active and well-integrated women’s section
• has an active and well-organised youth section
• has appropriate coaching in place
• contributes participants to KNCB coaching courses
• contributes players to the Dutch Lions programme and works constructively with KNCB coaches to further player development
• has a clear progression of players from youth teams into its senior sides
• works with local schools, sister sports clubs and other relevant organisations in order to broaden the popularity of cricket
• provides qualified umpires, and contributes participants to KNCB umpiring courses
• has appropriate arrangements for ensuring that scores are fully and correctly recorded
• consistently reports scorecards on time to the KNCB administration
• maintains a productive relationship with the local media
• works with other clubs in its region to promote the sport and avoid duplication of effort
• plays fully within the principles of the Spirit of the Game.
And here’s the challenge to every club administrator: beside how many of those elements can you honestly say your club can put a tick? There may be a few that you see as irrelevant, or beyond your present resources. But for Dutch cricket to thrive, I believe, much more needs to be done to ensure that there’s a steady progression towards such an ideal.
And a well-structured charter scheme would be a great way to recognise the efforts of clubs as they take every step on that path.