Last week in Arab News, Azeem Rafiq expressed his deep concerns about the return of a former chair of Yorkshire County Cricket Club to the club’s helm. Rafiq’s concerns are personal and raw, as have been detailed in several of my previous columns and by himself in a variety of media.
He blew a whistle on racism in 2020. Rafiq and his family have been hounded ever since.
However, his concerns are not limited to the personal attacks that he has endured. They spread more widely to concerns about the future governance of YCCC. In turn, these raise alarm bells about the governance and ownership of English and Welsh cricket at county level. Currently, all but three of the 18 counties are subject to membership ratification of proposals for change. No such checks and balances exist in franchise cricket, where executive power holds sway.
Colin Graves was the savior of YCCC in 2002, when he bailed the club out of bankruptcy. At that time, he was chair of a chain of convenience stores that he founded in 1986. The chain was sold in 2011 and in the following year he became executive chairman of YCCC. In 2015 he moved on to be chair of the England and Wales Cricket Board, leaving in 2020. It was during these two tenures that the racism — which Azeem Rafiq alleged was rife in YCCC — took place.
Rafiq’s revelations sparked a series of crises at YCCC and more widely within British cricket. Internecine strife broke out in Yorkshire. YCCC’s financial affairs deteriorated. In the financial year ended Dec. 31, 2022, a pre-tax loss of $2.83 million (£2.22 million) was reported, of which $2.10 million (£1.64 million) was attributed to actions taken as a result of the crises, including sizeable legal costs. Cash flow challenges became more acute, generating the need for cash injections. One of the club’s ongoing liabilities is the repayment of $19.1 million (£15 million) to the Graves Family Trust.
Who better, then, to come riding to the rescue, once again, than Colin Graves? Apparently, there were other suitors. It was widely reported that Mike Ashley, a previous, contentious, owner of Newcastle United FC had tabled a bid of $29.3 million (£23 million) to take over YCCC. This would have involved the purchase, renaming and leaseback of the stadium, as well as the repayment of the Graves Family Trust loan. It is believed that the deal-breaker was a rejection of Ashley’s request for England team kits to be manufactured under one of his brands. This decision by the ECB paved the way for Graves. On Jan. 10, YCCC’s board agreed to recommend his refinancing plan and submit details to members for ratification at an EGM on Feb. 2. A two-thirds majority is required.
On Jan. 16, Graves issued a manifesto for YCCC’s future. This contained a warning that failure to adopt his plan could lead to far-reaching consequences. He is seeking rule changes that allow him to appoint a new board of directors, seemingly on his terms. In echoes of Donald Trump, he urges the support of members to “make YCCC great again.” This smacks of a desire for absolute power. In emollient fashion, Graves apologizes for mistakes that he or the club have made in the recent past, pledging that all will be welcome at YCCC “regardless of background, community or ethnicity.” This will ring hollow for some parts of the community.
A charity, Sporting Equals, which promotes ethnic diversity in UK sport, issued an open letter in which it expressed concerns that the reinstatement of Graves could potentially undermine the progress that has been made in cricket to combat racism since Rafiq’s allegations. A particular point of irritation is that Graves is on record as saying that, during his time as YCCC chair, no one complained of racism at any level. Furthermore, he is on record as dismissing racist comments to Rafiq as “banter,” for which he received censure from the ECB. An apology was issued subsequently.
If members grant the control that Graves craves, some fundamental consequences may ensue. There have been rumors that an Indian Premier League franchise owner expressed interest in acquiring YCCC. This has set hares running along the lines that Graves will seek to change the mutual membership status of the club. He claims that there are no discussions or plans to achieve this. However, he adds, rather ominously, that “in the changing and challenging arena of both UK and world sport, nothing can be ruled out in the future.” It should be recalled that, during his time as chair of the ECB, The Hundred, a city-based hybrid franchise tournament, was introduced. Graves is on record as saying that he was aware of interest from Indian investors.
It would be easy to start joining up the dots. One of those dots is visible in Hampshire, where the county cricket club was saved from insolvency by Rod Bransgrove in 2000. He re-established the club as a business entity, developing a hotel, golf course and other entertainment at a new site. Bransgrove stepped down as chair last year, but owns more than 60 percent of shares in the company. Recently, news has broken that the company is in advanced negotiations to sell a stake to part-owners of one of the IPL franchises. As Hampshire is a limited company, there is no requirement to seek members approval.
There is a growing feeling in the English game that external overseas private investment is inevitable. Income levels for most counties are flat, costs are rising sharply and real estate resources are not used optimally. English cricket risks being left behind other cricketing countries. However, to create the opportunity for investment, its ownership structure may have to change. This will mean members having to vote for existing structures, which they long fought to preserve, to be dismantled. Yorkshire may find itself as the surprising testing ground for such action, unwittingly put in motion by a man who, initially, was seeking only an apology for racial abuse.
