Tony Becca

THE IMPASSE involving the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB), the West Indies players through the West Indies Players Association (WIPA), Digicel and Cable & Wireless is getting more intriguing with each passing day - so much so that one is now wondering when will it ever end, will it ever end, and if it ever ends, what will be its effect on West Indies cricket.

In the beginning, it was, as is becoming the norm, a confrontation between the Board and the players with Dr. Keith Mitchell, the prime minister of Grenada and chairman of the CARICOM sub-committee on cricket, acting as peacemaker.

Despite the Board's apparently strong stance that seven players would not be selected in the squad preparing for the series against South Africa unless they bowed to the Board's wishes re their contracts with Cable & Wireless, based on past experience, it was a good bet they would be selected, and that, if only for a while, there would be peace.

SIX-POINT PROPOSAL

Right now, however, it is more than that. In the past few days, in the days since Friday when Dr. Mitchell announced a six-point proposal that he believed should end the impasse as it would "preserve the integrity of the Digicel sponsorship with the WICB," it has developed into a confrontation between the Board's sponsors, Digicel, and the Board's former sponsors, Cable & Wireless, with the Board in the middle.

In the days since Friday, accusations have been flying left, right, and centre with Digicel accusing Cable & Wireless of many things - including deliberately signing six players to personal contracts after they (Cable & Wireless) had refused to match their US$20 million sponsorship package for five years and of doing so "in the full knowledge that their actions would create great difficulty for the WICB, the six players and the title sponsor, Digicel".

According to Digicel, they also had, in the interest of West Indies cricket and in an effort to solve the contract issue, approached representatives of Brian Lara, offered him "an enhanced individual sponsorship contract" when his existing contract with C&W expired but there was no response and since then Lara has extended his contract.

Apart from saying that they decided to expand their history of personal contracts with important West Indies players because of their commitment to become the lead regional sponsor of World Cup 2007, that it was not a strategy to ambush Digicel, that Lara had a contract with them dating back to 2003, and that the agreements with the other six players were made in April and May last year in line with signing the World Cup sponsorship on May 1 last year. Cable & Wireless have also said, however, that they never refused to match Digicel's US$20 million offer, that that figure was never put to them, and that what they did turn down, what was really put to them as what had been offered the Board was US$30 million.

That is interesting, really interesting.

According to Digicel, obviously based on what they were told by the Board's representatives, Cable & Wireless refused to match their offer of US$20 million - as simple as that; and according to the Cable & Wireless, that is not true ­ as simple as that.

TURNED DOWN

According to Cable & Wireless, what they turned down, what they were told was on the table, was US$30 million.

Is it that one is telling the truth and one is not telling the truth?

With Digicel saying that they will not accept Dr. Mitchell's suggestions to end the crisis, with Cable & Wireless calling on the Board to allow the best players to represent the West Indies, the Board is really in the middle and needs to act.

The problem, however, is that with sponsorship so important to West Indies cricket, with sponsors always afraid of getting involved with anything that could tarnish their image, the Board cannot afford to run the risk of the repercussions that could follow if it tells its sponsors of 20 years and the lead regional sponsors of the coming World Cup that they are not telling the truth - or if it tells its current sponsors that they are not telling the truth.

It is possible, however, that both are telling the truth, for while it may be true that Cable & Wireless had decided not to match Digicel's offer of US$20 million for five years, it is also possible, as they have said, that what Cable & Wireless refused to match was not US$20 million but US$30 million.

If the negotiations were done by a committee of the Board, then in an effort to end the crisis, in the interest of West Indies cricket, maybe what the Board should do is call in the committee, request the presence of those who represented Cable & Wireless at the negotiations and find out if the US$30 million was really on the table or if it was a figment of Cable & Wireless' imagination.

If it was really on the table, the Board then needs to find out how it ended up at US$20 million, and if it was not, the Board needs to find out who said it was, and why.