ECB ACO 2016 Conference

[Acumen]

Does anyone know what is happening at forthcoming AGM?

I understand that both Chairman and Vice Chairman have resigned.

I know Peter Mitchell intended to retire but the other resignations seem to be in protest at ECB's failure to fulfill the MoU.

Does anyone know any more?

[Democrat]

I understand that the AGM will be told about a forthcoming ballot of members.

This ballot is rumoured to include a proposal to deprive members of any voting rights for the appointment of senior officers.

If true, this completely wipes out the last vestiges of democracy from ACU&S merger and turns it into a complete takeover.

Why pay money to be a member of a voluntary organisation with no vote? Hardly encourages participation amongst the vast majority of members who simply want to umpire club and league cricket. It will only increase the perception that ACO is only for those select umpires who aspire to Minor Counties, D-List etc - especially in view of rapid promotion of James Middlebrook (and others).

Am I being too cynical or does anyone else agree with me?

[Democrat]

What do you really think of the present proposals?

More seriously, why is there no attempt to make the ballot secret?

However conscientious Martin Gentle is, he cannot help noticing the names of those who vote against the executive - and the record will be there afterwards.

[peter]

Is full integration into ECB better for the ACO than independence?

In six years as an ACO Board member (the last two as deputy to chairman Roger Knight) it has been clear that ECB has never truly valued the army of volunteer officials in recreational cricket. After an unhappy period in the control of Cricket Partnerships it took three years to agree a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between ACO and ECB to formalise a level of autonomy for the ACO. It was signed by the new CEO Tom Harrison in March 2015 and within months it became clear that it would not be fully honoured.

I resigned from the ACO Board in October 2016 because I disagree with the current proposal to fully integrate the ACO into ECB. I am firmly of the view that cricket officials should be independent of the national governing body (there is support for this view at a significant and senior level in ECB) and that funding should come from ECB, MCC, Sport England and members. It would not be costly however as members would contribute substantially to the running costs. In recent years the input from members, directly and indirectly, has exceeded £300,000 per year. Another £400,000 would probably enable independence; the salary of one senior England player!? An increase of membership to say 12,000 would obviously reduce the external subsidy by £120,000.

At present County Cricket Boards are supposed to help fund county ACOs but this doesn’t happen consistently. Independence would allow the new ACO to provide funds directly to each county ACO as it is needed.

The Players’ Surveys have given ECB a reminder of what players at recreational level want from cricket but the response to that call has been lukewarm. ‘Participation and Growth’ appears to be the ‘only game in town’ with much cash and ‘expertise’ being thrown at it. ‘More and better officials’ seems to be a very small part of the strategy although that was what the players said they wanted. Sadly the new ECB regional management structure, which will be responsible for delivering strategy has not, so far, acknowledged that officials should be represented even by a selected, suitably qualified volunteer.

The current plan is for ACO to retain the Head of ACO with an Administration Assistant and eventually a full-time Education Officer. All other functions would be subsumed into other ECB departments and the ACO would take its chance that someone would be free to produce the Magazine, arrange the Conference, etc. when required. The Board would become simply another management committee with little or no authority within ECB. Membership would still be managed at Edgbaston but the staff there would be managed by ECB not ACO. We were lucky to have employed Martin and Karen to look after ACO members but if they were to move on who would select their replacements?

Although I have left the ACO Board I hope to remain as Wiltshire ACO chairman and support our own officials. I shall continue to promote my views so that members have a clear picture of the problems that integration into ECB might present and for them to understand that there can be a better alternative in which they are fully involved.

Immediate independence would create logistical problems, of course, but with co-operation it should be possible. Agreement would be required regarding intellectual rights on programmes and courses. Management of members could be integrated into ‘whosetheumpire’ which already has most of the capability required. The cost of continuing with a requirement for DB&S woud have to be considered.

Older members will remember that ACU&S ran the association entirely with volunteers and it only failed when a fateful financial error was made regarding a sponsorship that didn’t deliver.

I believe that a truly independent association would have the energy and the focus to foster membership. Most of the work in education, performance and appointments is already being done by volunteers - not ECB employees - with all the necessary skills. This vital work could continue within an independent association, ideally linked to MCC, and it would leave the ECB to get on with all its other many responsibilities.

Is further integration really the only way forward?

How a vibrant, focussed and autonomous ACO could help to improve behaviour in recreational cricket

Recent press articles and radio broadcasts based on research by the University of Portsmouth have highlighted the huge increase in abuse directed at officials in recreational cricket by players and club officials. (Alison Mitchell’s Podcast 12 Nov “Do players show umpires enough respect?”: bbc.worldservice/stumped)

It is significant that the only real attempt to resolve this issue has come from MCC, the body that introduced the Spirit of Cricket as a Preamble to the Laws of Cricket. It ran a successful trial in the 2016 season of arming umpires with the power to send players from the field of play for breaches of a code of conduct. This initiative has been led by an Association of Cricket Officials (ACO) member employed by MCC. The ECB, at least historically, has paid little attention to player behaviour except when officials have been severely abused and then high level disciplinary action is taken. Surely prevention is better than cure.

The ACO’s education courses are under review to take account the newly revised Laws and of another MCC initiative to provide on-line courses on the Laws. It is possible therefore that even more officials could take the field with only an academic knowledge of the Laws. They will have done this alone in front of a computer without any ‘face to face’ contact with a mentor, coach or qualified tutor but will consider themselves to be competent umpires. Theoretically the lack of discipline could therefore get worse. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!

Unfortunately the ACO has not always directed its efforts to raising standards. The view has been that ‘education for all’ is more important than standards of performance and quality assurance. The outcome only too often is that umpires have a good knowledge of the Laws but insufficient training on how to manage a game of cricket and to cope with players’ bad behaviour. Lack of strong sanctions under many league Codes of Conduct, and in many cases lack of support from leagues and clubs, have contributed to the decline in behaviour.

In January 2015 there was an ACO initiative to set up a formal quality assurance programme with clear standards for accreditation of observers and assessors of umpires and scorers. This faltered due to the ill health of the consultant involved. Eventually the programme was restarted with another consultant (ACO member and former ECB employee) and real progress is being made.

Alongside the raising of standards for new officials there needs to be a programme of Continuous Professional Development (CPD) for existing umpires many of whom have had little or no training in field craft and man management techniques. The ACO has achieved a membership of just over 8000 including scorers. Of this number only about 5000 are active umpires. It is estimated that there could be as many as 20,000 people each week ‘officiating’ in cricket matches throughout the country. How many of these have had any training and how many have the right insurance to protect them?

Well trained officials armed with a disciplinary code such as that trialled by MCC would surely reduce the problems of poor player behaviour.

The professional umpire has a comparatively easy job supported by technology and match referees at the highest levels and with sanctions that can hurt. Umpiring recreational cricket matches is very different and can be a very demanding and sometimes dangerous job especially in the lower leagues. It is not for the untrained or the uncommitted.


Tony Hemmings

[Bob]

Wasn't the ACU&S independent?? Wasn't ECB ACO started to integrate officials more into the ECB?? If we are talking about going independent again, is it not a step backwards? Did the ACU&S membership vote not mean anything? Maybe we should include Brexit on our ballot paper?

[Lord Red]

I have already voted but Mr Hemmings sums up my view. How do you appoint a volunteer? The only reference to funding is that it will be the responsibility of the "appointed" Regional Representative. The ECB have bypassed the ECB ACO sub committees on a regular basis. Consider the way CricHQ got in on the act. Having stated that the ECB did not want to dictate the choice of software it then just appointed CricHQ as their software of choice. Now that CricHQ is offering a Cricket Support package that carries out the tasks that Play Cricket fails to do where is that support? Many years ago Cathy Rawson said that she thought getting into bed with the ECB was not the best route for officials. She was right.

[Acumen]

I have been advised by a Senior ACO Officer that some of Tony Hemmings facts are incorrect. Unfortunately I am in no position to say which are wrong. I regret I cannot take responsibility for the accuracy of any material placed on this discussion board - we only remove obscene or seriously abusive material.

[Dylx8]

Perhaps the "Senior ACO Officer" could post here with details of which facts are incorrect, and what the correct facts are. Or would that be too open.

[laurie]

I have been given a cricket holdall to sell for a local charity ...it has the initials ECB and ACO on the side...not being a cricketer...I think ECB is English Cricket Board...but what does ACO stand for please ?

I have also got a men's slip over with a logo on ... an owl under a pair of scales with the word NOMPERE on a banner under the owl...can anyone please tell me what this means?

The cricket holdall has the name Fearnley on each end and so I take it that it was sold by this firm

I know that my questions may sound odd to you but not being a cricketer I need to find out about the holdall if I am to be successful in selling it for the charity

If you could email me with any answers I would be very grateful

[e-mail]

Regards

Laurie