World Cup puts South African cricket's governance battle on hold

Moves that could lead to cricket in South Africa being plunged back into administrative and financial chaos have been put on hold. But that doesn't mean they have gone away.

There is, Cricbuzz has learnt, a push among the presidents of CSA's 15 provincial affiliates for fewer independent directors to sit on the organisation's board. The current constitution says the board should be composed of eight independent and five non-independent members, with the chair an independent.

The non-independents tend to be provincial presidents — some of whom are calling for a narrowing of the gap in those numbers. Other provincial presidents want the majority of the board drawn from their ranks. They can only dream of how things were without any independents, an era that ended in February 2013.

Diluting the board's independent component would likely raise alarm among sponsors, governance watchdogs and the cricket-minded public, who would worry the game was about to regress after several years of progress.

"Because they've lost control and they don't like it," an insider told Cricbuzz on condition of anonymity. "They're not even part of the SA20, which is uber successful. [Two of] their provinces have been put under administration. They've become irrelevant, and they can't handle that. They believe by getting power back they'll become relevant. But the reality is they will kill the game."

Outgoing Gauteng president Earl Glennistor, who sits on CSA's board as part of the members council, said he was "not pushing" for a return to the old system. But he added the idea wasn't new: "When I got to the members council [in May 2020] it was there already." Did he think it should happen?

"I'm torn [between a majority of independent or non-independent directors]," Glennistor said. "If we look at other federations in our country, like rugby and soccer, one is very good and one is very bad. But both of them are controlled by non-independent directors. So it really depends on who's on the board."

The South African Rugby Union reported losses of USD1.9-million for 2025 — USD300,000 more than the South African Football Association. But by every other measure, rugby is in starkly better shape than football.

The Springboks have won four of the nine men's World Cups they have contested — no other team has triumphed as frequently. Bafana Bafana have advanced beyond the group stage only once in four World Cup trips and have failed to qualify five times.

It is exponentially more difficult to reach football's World Cup finals than rugby's. But the differences between the overall health of the two codes is painfully obvious. Rugby has its political infighting and squabbles over money; football is crippled by corruption and chronic organisational crises.

Below international level, cricket is poorer than football. Of the 15 provincial affiliates, only Northerns, Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal — fielding the Titans, Lions and Dolphins — are on a firm financial footing. The other dozen provinces, including sides based at iconic grounds like Newlands and St George's Park, are on life support provided by CSA.

Provincial presidents say they want a greater say in how the game is run. Yet they are responsible for the mess cricket is in in most provinces. More of them on CSA's board would mean, to many, more mess.

Even so, there is an argument that CSA's largely independent board makes decisions based on the greater organisational good in line with fiduciary imperatives. That's all well and good viewed from the top. From the level of the provinces, who feel marginalised, not so much.

"A strong CSA means strong affiliates," one provincial president said. "Strong affiliates means strong clubs. It filters all the way down. Cricket in this country is not made up of the people in the Proteas. It's made up of every single person who supports the Proteas."

A veteran administrator said, "The biggest problem is the overwhelming position taken by independents. The provincial presidents feel their voices are lost in the system. And that less and less is being spent on actual cricket, which seems to be taking a smaller role because everything is concentrated on how the finances look. But they have to understand that without finances you can't sustain yourself."

They also have to understand that cricket is not the sport and industry it used to be, as an insider explained: "The world game has changed dramatically. So much so that the South Africa under-19 team is a better platform for finding Proteas players than provincial cricket. You have to play in the SA20 to be able to play white-ball cricket for South Africa.

"We're living in a totally different environment compared to five or 10 years ago. Yet the members council are adamant that we must have the old status quo. That's gone.

"Provincial cricket is development cricket. It's not professional cricket in the sense that it has commercial value. It has no commercial value. That's very threatening to the presidents.

"Border and Free State are irrelevant in the actual running of the game of cricket. That's disempowered the presidents and they can't handle it.

"Then you have a board of majority independent directors who, in exercising their fiduciary duty — which they have to take seriously because there's liability attached — put provinces like Border and Northern Cape under administration. In the old days it would have been a case of, 'We won't put you under administration because next week it could be one of our provinces.'"

CSA's board was wholly non-independent until February 2013, when five independents joined as many provincial presidents. That happened in the wake of a scandal over improperly declared bonuses equivalent to USD555,000 paid to CSA by the IPL in recognition of South Africa's successful hosting, at short notice, of the 2009 edition of the tournament.

It took an even bigger calamity — CSA's protracted pile-up of failures under president Chris Nenzani and chief executive Thabang Moroe — to drag the board to its current composition in June 2021.

"There's no doubting that taking away the members council's power has had massive positives," an insider said. "One is that we've seen sponsorships come on board like never before. Yet these guys think they can go back to the old days and have their power. It's scary."

CSA will hold their annual meeting on September 26. But a return to the previous board model will not be up for discussion or decision.

"We need stability in the game," another source said — especially, they didn't have to add, with the men's World Cup scheduled to be played in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia in October and November next year.

You can't hand control of the asylum to the crazies while the world is watching. But the world won't always be watching, and therein lies the danger. Expect this conversation to resume after the World Cup.