By Dr Akshai Mansingh, Contributor
Hall and Mcneill
I have to agree with Chris Dehring on the beauty of the West Indies, where anything said can be taken in many ways.
I had written a letter to the editor in response to an article by Charlene Ashley entitled "Cricket as a tourism Product", which was instead published as a commentary. In the same medium, an article saw some positive points in my letter and thought it could be considered as part of selling Jamaica as a whole. Chris, however, took offence to my profession! I have no intention in starting a personality war, certainly not with one whom I've know for over 25 years and played with on many cricket teams.
I do feel, however, that in his objection to an Orthopaedic Surgeon commenting on cricket, many of the points raised in my letter were missed. And indeed many of his own I feel need clarification. I will be the first to admit that I have no specialist degree in cricket. My ignorance extends to not knowing anyone who does. But what I can tell you is that many advances in medicine were made by listening to patients. I consider myself a "cricket consumer", and to that end feel free to discuss the topic; as should all other consumers. My letter raised general points about marketing of cricket and was certainly not meant to "mash corns".
It seems to have been taken as an indictment of the performance of the marketing division of the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB). Well, "who the cap fits-."
I wish to respond to points raised by Chris in sequence. He accused the media of criticising the WICB for over-focusing on marketing. Certainly that criticism was not levelled at the marketing division of the Board. If so, I have to agree that we are unique; for criticising someone for focusing too hard on their job!
I share his remorse for his not being invited to present at the CARICOM/ UWI Conference on Cricket held in Barbados in June 2000. Unfortunately I was an invitee and not an organiser, and could not fight for his inclusion. I think it is important to put this conference in perspective as it was simply trivialised as "the UWI held a regional conference on West Indies Cricket",. All CARICOM nations were part- hosts to this event. In Jamaica, the Minister of Sports, the Hon. Portia Simpson-Miller convened the "Jamaican Subcommittee" to discuss issues on how we could aid in improving West Indies Cricket. The Subcommittee was comprised of people from Insports, Jamaica Cricket Association, Media, other interests (including organisers of the Mound), and Chaired by the Hon. Dr. Wykham McNeill (Oh No, another doctor!). I had the honour of sitting on that subcommittee. Jamaica's paper was presented by Michael Hall, now Chief Cricket Operations Officer of the WICB, with Minister McNeill heading the delegation. Similar papers and delegations were present from all West Indian Cricket Countries. Present at the conference were Edwin Carrington, Secretary-General of CARICOM. Active participants included Rev. Wes Hall (now President of WICB), past greats like Gordon Greenidge, Desmond Haynes, Joel Garner, representatives of sponsors (including Busta and Scotiabank). And of course, a presentation was made by then Vice-President of the WICB, Clarvis Joseph. Apologies were tendered for the then President, Pat Rousseau who was undergoing a major personal tragedy. Neither the representatives of the Board, nor any other delegate seemed to have had any problem with the flow of ideas, irrespective of the professions of the presenters.
I am willing to concede that the South Africa tour last year and the New Zealand tour this year were televised in India and New Zealand, respectively, if it could be confirmed that all the 30 days (5 Tests and 5 One Day Internationals (ODI)) against South Africa and all the 15 days of the New Zealand tour were televised. I know for a fact that the ODI were televised, but 5 days does not a tour make. I also know that ODI carry more appeal to the television world. However, as I watched the Sri Lanka Bangladesh Test on a cable channel here last week, I wondered if they too are teams the world clamours to see! Or perhaps that match was given free to the television company. Whatever it was, to me watching these teams sitting in Jamaica reasserts the point made in my letter that we are " simply another cog in the multifaceted cricket world". Of course what would be unique is to sell a 30 day packet and have only 5 days shown.
I am not only aware, but also proud of the magic of the West Indies team, but will warn you that this will fade away if it is not marketed properly. All other countries are playing their part in making cricket more attractive, perhaps because they consider the public an asset, not an inconvenience. Hence Coloured clothing in International Cricket, Night Cricket etc. was adopted after the World Cup in Australia and New Zealand in 1991-2.
Boundary rope advertising was introduced in Zimbabwe in 1999, after a player came up with the idea and got approval from the ICC. The way one-day cricket is played was revolutionised by the Sri Lankans in World Cup1996. We, being as unique as we are, have not really contributed anything to the marketing, or playing of cricket of late. And that goes for merchandising as well. I am sorry if containers were stolen from Guyana and Jamaica during the last Test Series, but the point made in the letter was that I cannot get these items at any time of the year.
To put it more bluntly, I, a consumer, would like to buy West Indies Merchandise at my convenience, not yours. And if the only way found to reach out to John Public in the West Indies is to set up an Internet shopping site, then I think John Public is being misunderstood. I agree that if I had to market it myself, then I too, may have failed to work out the complexities of "inter-island commerce" and merchandising as seems to have happened. But what I cannot understand is how clothing and paraphernalia from all other major sports lines have pervaded every nook and cranny of the Caribbean. All sports stores carry at least one of the major brands and I seem to be able to buy it at any time of the year. Being naive about such matters, I cannot understand how a company like Manchester United can have both a two storey shop and road side kiosks in far off places like Singapore, and we cannot convince even one store per West Indian Territory to carry our products year round. Perhaps we are unique.
I stand corrected in the fact that "the tourist boards of Barbados, Antigua, and several other Caribbean Countries in conjunction with the WICB, have for at least 20 years, actively promoted sports tourism-". I had stated in my letter, "part of the problem still remains the belief that apart from England and Australia, the rest of the World is not worth marketing to." Reassured now that in fact the entire world (especially North America) is being actively targeted for EVERY tour, I now have to wonder why we can only attract visitors for English tours from England alone, from such promotions. Or is that part of our uniqueness.
I am a great fan of concepts like the Mound and am proud that the idea originated in the region. I still feel however, that it should be broadened to be a showcased as a major production at Lunch time, in the middle of the field. Now I accept that I have no expertise in putting on such shows. But the fact that acoustics don't seem to be a problem in open stadium where Olympics are held, or during a Superbowl or similar events, suggests that someone does in fact have the knowledge. But are we trying to be unique in re-discovering it for ourselves?
The world of cricket is changing, like all other sports. I agree that we were unique in being World beaters for 25 years, spurring teams to work out scientific methods (including fitness programmes and television-video aides) to find a way to beat us. While this was happening, marketing, television coverage and the like also became major issues. We now have the choice to rest on our laurels and believe that our uniqueness will get us through, or wake up to the fact that we have to keep up with the world.
I would like to reassert that the main assets of West Indies Cricket are the players and the public. Any efforts to exclude inputs from either of these groups can only be viewed as non-progressive and arrogant.
