Peever outlines next steps for Cricket Australia review

By Vince Rugari, Vince Rugari is a Roar Guru

 , ,

24 Have your say

    Cricket Australia (CA) chairman David Peever has assured chief executive James Sutherland’s position is not under threat despite a forthcoming root-and-branch review into the organisation’s culture.

    The independent review will run in tandem with another player-driven process – headed by former Test opener Rick McCosker – to draw up a “charter” for standards of behaviour and expectations of Australian men’s cricket teams.

    It comes as the governing body attempts to move on from the ball-tampering scandal from last month’s Cape Town Test, which has seen skipper Steve Smith, vice-captain David Warner and Cameron Bancroft issued with lengthy suspensions and the sport itself thrown into crisis.

    However, it appears Sutherland is safe regardless of the outcomes of the review, with Peever declaring he had the “full support” of the CA board.

    There is no indication as to who will lead the review or how long it will take, but Peever said it would not descend into a “witch-hunt.”

    “I think we’re all going to come under the microscope in terms of what is occurring back in the organisation that might have contributed to this,” Peever told reporters in Brisbane on Friday.

    “But I can tell you this, circumstances like this are not the time for witch-hunts.

    “I know people in these circumstances call for everybody to be sacked.

    “Clearly, that isn’t going to solve any problems.

    “What we must do now is work on the issues that we have and we take responsibility for fixing them and making them better.”

    Peever, who also claimed he had no intention to step down as chairman, said Sutherland had done an “outstanding” job handling the Cape Town crisis.

    “I know that when the time comes for James to make a decision about what he wants to do in regards to his role in Cricket Australia, he will be remembered as one of the best servants of cricket in this country,” he said.

    McCosker, meanwhile, is expected to be joined on a panel for the player-driven review by two ex-players and two current players.

    Peever said that process would help form reference points for the independent review, which will establish if there are links between the “culture, processes and governance” of CA and what happened in South Africa.

    © AAP 2018
    Rebuild announcement

    Have Your Say

    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (24)

    • Roar Guru

      April 6th 2018 @ 4:13pm
      Rellum said | April 6th 2018 @ 4:13pm | ! Report

      Yay, a review. Those have been so great for us in the recent past.

    • Roar Guru

      April 6th 2018 @ 4:15pm
      Cadfael said | April 6th 2018 @ 4:15pm | ! Report

      Of course it won’t descend into a wutch hunt. It will be a whitewash. Sadly this culture isn’t anything new and has been going on and has brrn accpted by CA as long as the side was winning. A bit hard to turn on the players and coaches when it was previously quietly accepted. Any detrimental results will not show CQA in a good light.

    • April 6th 2018 @ 4:24pm
      Bakkies said | April 6th 2018 @ 4:24pm | ! Report

      On the topic of bottom feeders. David Peever the Cameron de Clyne of Australian Cricket should be shafted particularly after his remarks to Channel 10 which will cost the game even more bargaining power.

      • April 6th 2018 @ 4:30pm
        Linphoma said | April 6th 2018 @ 4:30pm | ! Report

        I can’t see his position being strengthened by those revelations.
        What a grubby business this is….How were his emails leaked?

        • April 6th 2018 @ 5:37pm
          Dave.SA said | April 6th 2018 @ 5:37pm | ! Report

          Business correspondence leaked.. What a surprise.

          In my corporate life I was involved in many high value deals and email mistakes are regular
          1. The most common mistake is that people copy too many people… Every person you copy increases leaking risks
          2. Not making it clear that the correspondence is confidential – probably not true here
          – Dont say things you may regret if it gets out – You may obey Rule 1 and 2. Remember someone can innocently forward it to a colleague who fwds it to more and it just takes one bad egg…. and its out in the open

          If you are going to get that tough do it on the phone or face to face…

          Of course CA may not be unhappy this has leaked

        • April 7th 2018 @ 8:39am
          Bakkies said | April 7th 2018 @ 8:39am | ! Report

          Just like the RA were caught out lying about not knowing about the sale of the Rebels last year. An email trail was leaked in a confidential submission and a journalist got hold of it. It is now in the hands of ASIC.

          The RA were also caught out lying when they said they didn’t know they will cut a team in 2016. Minutes from an August 2016 meeting were submitted in email format to the Senate Inquiry stating that they had voted to cut a side.

    • April 6th 2018 @ 5:22pm
      Brasstax said | April 6th 2018 @ 5:22pm | ! Report

      I do not understand why people who ultimately bear most of the responsibility for overseeing things for years leading to this mess run the review and decide beforehand that they are untouchables.

      I wish I could mess up at my job and blame and fire a few of my subordinates and give myself a clean chit and a raise.

    • April 6th 2018 @ 5:42pm
      Akkara said | April 6th 2018 @ 5:42pm | ! Report

      Many articles I’ve read question James Sutherlands position. How come the board doesn’t see it that way?

      • April 7th 2018 @ 8:40am
        Bakkies said | April 7th 2018 @ 8:40am | ! Report

        They’re gutless. The Chairman should go too.

    • Roar Guru

      April 6th 2018 @ 6:14pm
      Corne Van Vuuren said | April 6th 2018 @ 6:14pm | ! Report

      One thing that never surprises, the people in power are the ones that survive the inquest as they arrange it.

      Unless someone at the top is specficially targetted, and that they won’t reveal to the media

    , ,