Cricket Australia chairman Earl Eddings has bowed to pressure from multiple states, stepping down on the eve of what was shaping up to be an acrimonious annual general meeting.
CA has installed Richard Freudenstein as interim chair, with the former Foxtel chief executive to oversee Thursday’s AGM.
The governing body hopes to appoint a permanent chair by the end of this year, vowing to undertake a “rigorous process involving input from the state and territory members” as it seeks to restore calm after yet another destabilising episode.
CA’s board released a statement last month, unanimously endorsing Eddings to serve another term as chair despite Cricket NSW and Queensland Cricket both pushing for his 13-year stint as a director to end.
But agitation for change and disgruntlement has since grown at state level and even among some CA directors, especially about Eddings’ purported succession plan.
Rather than make a last-ditch effort to maintain control throughout a vitally-important summer featuring men’s and women’s Ashes series, the Victorian accepted on Wednesday morning that it was time to go.
Eddings, who oversaw the removal of Kevin Roberts as chief executive amid last year’s upheaval, confirmed via a statement that he will not stand for re-election as a director.
“It is my sincere hope that following my resignation the state and territory associations can unite and work together in the best interests of cricket, allowing the focus to return to the sport ahead of the 2021-22 season,” Eddings said.
“It has been an honour and a privilege to be able to serve the sport I love.”
Eddings replaced David Peever as CA chairman in 2018, when his predecessor also resigned after a phone call from Cricket NSW equivalent John Knox.
The interim promotion soon became permanent despite Cricket Victoria raising public objections.
CA’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic raised fresh questions about Eddings’ leadership from NSW and Queensland, who successfully pushed back against a cost-cutting drive that included slashing states’ funding.
Roberts’ departure and the Seven Network provided brief public respite from infighting, with the governing body, states and players’ union united in their response to the free-to-air broadcaster’s campaign for a big discount to its rights fees.
But Knox and Chris Simpson, a former state captain who replaced judge Salvatore Vasta as Queensland Cricket boss in 2019, always remained unconvinced about Eddings.
“I would like to extend my thanks to all of those who have worked hard to support the sport, and me personally, during my term as chair,” Eddings said on Wednesday, detailing his pride in the growth of women’s cricket and improved reputation of Australian cricket since the Cape Town cheating scandal.
“My passion for the game is undiminished.”
The state associations, effectively CA’s shareholders, will vote on the re-election of directors Lachlan Henderson and Greg Rowell at Thursday’s AGM.
Speaking to the ABC former cricket captain Ian Chappell said he wanted more cricket experience on the board.
“The lack of cricket knowledge there is alarming,” Chappell said.
“Putting the cricket Australia board together is like picking a cricket team — it’s got to be a combination of things.
“The combination is too much business, marketing and finance.
“You have to have those people there, but you also have to have some people there that understand what it takes to win at the highest level.”
Paul
Roar Guru
I'm so far not impressed with Hockley at all. I'm sure he's doing plenty in the background but his public persona suggests he's an overpaid cheer squad leader, whose main role is to say lots of positive things but not provide answers to sticky questions. Obviously I hope he's right and there are no more issues, but we're a month or 6 weeks from England being in-country and this tour is not settled. That's simply not good.
All day Roseville all day
Roar Guru
Until 10 years ago the votes were based on history. CA had 14 directors, each of them simultaneously also a State one. NSW, SA and Vic (the founders) each provided 3. Qld and WA each provided 2. Tas got 1. Which created the potential for voting blocs and side-deals. Any two founders could combine for more than one-third of the 14 votes, to prevent constitutional change. Late-arrivals Qld got less say than SA, despite their relative sizes and importance. So 14 State directors were replaced by 9 independent ones. But as a concession the States (as shareholders) retained important rights which they could exercise by combining.
All day Roseville all day
Roar Guru
It's a perceived or actual conflict of interest thing, when the interests of Australian cricket and your own State don't always align. What if it's best for Australian cricket that you vote one way, but for your State that you vote another ? If a current State director voted at CA level against their State's instructions, their State would replace them with someone more obedient. As a director, you must always act in your organisation's best interest. The conflict is removed by not making a CA director beholden to their State- you can't be both at the same time. But the States do remain shareholders, so have rights but they no longer include the direct appointment of all CA directors. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-14/cricket-australia-criticised-for-high-chair-salary-at-agm/100538974 Examples of potential perceived conflict of interest are each State's grant levels, whether Sydney gets a New Year's Test (it didn't in 1995-96 and 1996-97, as its ACB directors were out-voted), and whether Shane Warne (Vic) or Steve Waugh (NSW) succeeds Mark Taylor as captain.
Ian
Roar Rookie
Nick Hockley has just been on the radio over here saying that he's totally confident about the Ashes going ahead, although he is a bit worried about the 5th Test taking place in Perth. On going discussions are taking place but he's 100% confident that she'll be right mate ( OK that last sentence was mine ) Apparently the ECB are 'digging their heels in' over certain conditions and no one wants to tell us what they are. The whole thing has the potential to be a total farce if they're not careful.
Paul
Roar Guru
I won't think the Ashes is 100% a goer until the last ball of the 5th Test is bowled, Ian :happy: We saw in that last England series against India, what can happen to cricket with zero notice
Paul
Roar Guru
especially in States like NSW which likes to think it's votes carry more weight.
Ian
Roar Rookie
I would imagine the first time they voted against their states interests would be the last time they were allowed to vote!
Paul
Roar Guru
I'm not trying to be obtuse, but how can a person supposedly representing a State, not take direction from senior cricket officials in that State? I get that they can vote how they see fit, but if that's contrary to what the majority in that State want, I wonder how long they'd last as delegate?
All day Roseville all day
Roar Guru
Cricketers used to refer to the board's viewing room at the SCG as "bull#$%@ castle." Which was actually unfair considering the thousands of hours of unpaid service that those in the room gave to Australian cricket. A cucumber sandwich was not much of a thankyou. Many of them were retired Test players and even captains. Will any current player give back like that, post-retirement ?
Ian
Roar Rookie
The Ashes isn't 100% set in stone yet. Apparently there are still some issues to be sorted out from this end. I get the distinct feeling that the ECB wouldn't mind at all if the whole thing was cancelled. The cricket media here are still sulking as apparently only 12 or so of them will be given exemptions in Australia. Everyone else will have to take their chances with regards lockdowns etc. BT Sport which has the TV rights aren't sending a team and will be taking the Channel 7 feed and I'm not sure whats happening with the BBC radio coverage. Agnew says he's going but I'm not sure how many others will be going with him. So I think you make a good point re the ECB. I just wish everyone would just shut up and try to concentrate on the cricket.
All day Roseville all day
Roar Guru
Until ten years ago State associations delegated some of their directors to simultaneously serve as CA directors. Nowadays no State association director can be a CA director at the same time. As a result no State association can instruct a CA director how to vote. They've become independent. So CA's directors could unanimously support CA's chairman, while at the same time a State association could be opposed to him.
Keith Griffen
Guest
This is really odd. Almost politician like. Was there and issue with 3m which just surfaced, no pun intended?
All day Roseville all day
Roar Guru
Back in the 80s and 90s, the NSW players used to refer to the board's box at the SCG as "bullshit castle."
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Does Mel Jones count as a "proper" cricketer in Ian's eyes?
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Curious from Chappelli; given he comes from a time when his interaction was with a Board populated by ex-cricketers whose main administrative capability was a focus on the quality of cucumber sandwiches being delivered to the board room.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Spot on Chappelli! :thumbup:
Paul
Roar Guru
"CA’s board released a statement last month, unanimously endorsing Eddings". The kiss of death. I'm not clear how he could have received unanimous support, when this story says he was shafted by delegates from at least two States? I'll bet this infighting is making the ECB nervous.
JGK
Roar Guru
Weird comment from Chappell. There are plenty of former cricketers involved.