County News: EGMs Lancashire, Notts and Essex

 

Lancashire leadership on the precipice as county members crank up the pressure

GEORGE DOBELL: A series of SGMs are planned at several first-class counties amid discontent around the direction of travel and the process of determining the structure for next summer and beyond

Daniel Gidney is facing a vote of no confidence from a group of disgruntled Lancashire members who claim he is guilty of "misconduct".

The chief executive will face the vote at a Special General Meeting (SGM) on September 8, following an accusation he effectively "misled" members over the ongoing domestic review. This, the resolution alleges, "amount[s] to misconduct".

Specifically, it is alleged that Gidney told Lancashire members, who had previously been informed they would be given a binding vote on Lancashire's position in the negotiations, that the ECB had given the counties three options for the future schedule of the County Championship. All options outlined by the club featured 12 games a season.

The group of members insist this was a misrepresentation of the position at the time. They point to a leaked email, sent from Warwickshire chair Mark McCafferty (also chair of the Professional Game Committee), which suggests options for a 14-match season were also being discussed by counties.

"The requisitioning members believe this shows that the chief executive knowingly misled the members on both the choices put forward by the ECB and the timing for the final vote," the request for an SGM states.

"Member choice was wrongly restricted, and undue time pressure was put on members to vote before any objections could be made. The requisitioning members believe that these actions amount to misconduct on the part of the chief executive."

Gidney strenuously denies the allegations. He insists he acted in good faith and provided members with the most up-to-date information as it was received from the ECB.

Lancashire also point out they held three members' forums to discuss options and that, at the time, it did seem a 12-game option was most likely. The Cricketer understands the club is also exploring the option of defamation proceedings against some of those involved in organising the call for an SGM.

The resolution at the SGM is not binding but would be an embarrassment to Gidney, the longest serving male CEO around the first-class counties, and put the board in a difficult position. A simple majority is all that is required for the resolution to be passed.

"Our chief executive has our full and unequivocal support," a letter circulated to members from the Lancashire board states. "The board strongly urges all members to vote against the resolution."

The letter goes on to remind members that, when Gidney was appointed (at the end of 2012), the club had suffered three successive years of losses and was facing the possibility of bankruptcy. Revenue has grown to around £35m a year (from around £10m when he started) with the ground redevelopment bringing in a large amount of non-cricket related revenue.

"We are proud to be a member-led club and encourage all our members to have their say," a spokesperson for the club said.

"Lancashire Cricket is now investing record sums in the game after facing bankruptcy in 2012. This is why the board and coaching staff are opposing these motions, and ask members to join them."

The same group of members had previously called for a vote of no confidence in the club's chair, Andy Anson. But he stepped down after the club received notification of the call for the SGM - it appears he was likely to depart in three months anyway, but brought forward the date - so Gidney effectively became the subject of the requisitionists.

Lancashire is also facing an SGM on September 1. On that date, there is a call for a vote of no confidence in the nominations committee.

Meanwhile, the entire Nottinghamshire committee is facing a similar vote at an Extraordinary General Meeting on September 11. Two resolutions will be voted upon at the meeting, the first demanding that the club "oppose any proposal reducing the number of County Championship games" and the second the vote into each member of the club's general committee (GC).

"In the petitioning members' view, too many GC members have made little or no attempt…. to liaise with members before making decisions on our behalf," the outline of the resolution reads. "A consequence of this is the loss of trust in the GC and the club itself by the petitioning members."

It might be noted that the same person, Nick Evans, a member at both clubs, is the lead petitioner behind the call for SGMs at both Lancashire and Nottinghamshire. A petition for an SGM has also been presented at Essex, though no meeting has been scheduled at the time of reporting.

"The clubs could not be further apart in the way they have reacted," Evans told The Cricketer. "Notts could not have been more helpful in terms of arranging the meeting, communicating with the members and allowing them to make up our own minds. They've provided a model example of how to react in such circumstances.

"Lancashire have been far more resistant and even hostile. They've been very defensive, it feels like they've tried to thwart us at every opportunity. That's probably why we've ended up in this position."

In the longer term, The Cricketer understands the ECB, who have become frustrated by the difficulty in passing structural reforms, may seek to introduce governance changes to raise the threshold by which members can call SGMs.

In some cases, including both Notts and Lancs, only 100 signatures are required to call such a meeting. In Lancashire's case, that is fewer than two per cent of the voting membership, which is currently around 6,000.

At heart, the episode highlights the discontent from many county members around repeated attempts to cut the number of County Championship games played each season. Similar sentiment effectively blocked Andrew Strauss' plans to bring in changes a few years ago.

As things stand, it seems probable - though not certain - that the counties will vote on a proposal which would see the Championship schedule cut to 12 or 13 games (six teams contesting promotion, relegation and the championship title would play 13 matches) in the coming days.  If that proposal is rejected, the schedule will remain as it is now with 14 matches per team per season.