Orville Higgins | Has Skerritt abandoned ‘West Indies first’ policy?

It is approximately nine months ago that Ricky Skerritt pulled off what was considered a major upset at the time, when he managed to wrest the reins of leadership of Cricket West Indies from Dave Cameron.

Skerritt was scathing about Cameron’s leadership style, and had launched a vigorous campaign to unseat him. Central to the message that was preached by Skerritt at the time was the desire to see more West Indians in key coaching positions.

He was upset, for example, about the appointment of Richard Pybus to the head coaching role against England early last year. He was not the only one in the hierarchy of West Indies Cricket who did not approve of Pybus. In fact Skerritt had stated at the time that “ … The board was already expressing concern about the propensity and overdependence on coaches from other countries, who may not understand the West Indian culture.”

The rhetoric at the time was “West Indies first”as the mantra when selecting coaches, where the impression was clearly created that coaches of “West Indies descent” would be given priority.

Less than a year after taking office, we are witnessing a slew of coaching appointments under the Skerritt regime.

Monty Desai has signed a deal to be the batting coach. Trevor Penney has been brought on board to be the new assistant coach with special duties fielding in white ball cricket. We have also learnt that Chris Brabazon has been appointed as ‘coaching education manager’. In simpler terms, he has essentially been brought in to help coach West Indian coaches.

Radical departure

Brabazon’s appointment especially seems to be a radical departure from the mandate of placing West Indies cricket in the hands of West Indian people. None of these three new coaching appointees are West Indians. They are from as far away as India and Australia, and for what it’s worth, they are all Caucasians and cannot be said to be of West Indies heritage.

The obvious question then is whether the Skerritt regime has departed from the policy that they were projecting at the time they were campaigning. Three overseas coaches in three key positions cannot be mere coincidence, or is it?

What is interesting is that by employing these coaches from far away lands, it means there are local coaches that have been overlooked. Desmond Haynes, for example, would, I presume, loved to have the role as batting coach that has been given to Monty Desai. None of this means that the new appointees will not do well. Indeed, they all come with impressive résumés.

I like Skerritt; he appears to be a decent, humble man, who I believe means well. Skerritt and his board may well get these new overseas coaches to turn our cricket around.

However, it just seems strange that a president who had catapulted himself into office, largely on the basis of looking after our own, would be presiding over so many foreign appointments after such a short time. The whole thing seems a little odd to me. What say you?