|
Opinion / Editorial
By Shawn Patton
*** Updated ***
Back in April I expressed my firmly held belief: the people that got you into a "mess" aren't necessarily the people best capable to lead you out.
Despite a culture in squash that seems uncomfortable with scrutiny, fair comment and deviations from any coverage of our sport that isn't viewed through rose colored glases, I continued my Op/Ed by asking some blunt questions:
1. How many complaints have been expressed over the years concerning the mis-management of the PSA and consequent impact on the players (incomes & health), promoters, sponsors and the game as a whole? Gawain Briars is not solely responsible in my estimation.
2. Who were the Board Members that presided over his selection and contract negotiations? Who were the Board Members who seemed unwilling or incapable of getting to the bottom of player concerns during the Briars' era?
3. Have the actions and accomplishments of the current Board demonstrated they have the skills, business network and vision to take the PSA forward?
I then went out further on limb and outlined why I felt several of the PSA Board of Directors should resign to allow change, renewal:
Top 10 Reasons Why SOME PSA Board Members Should Step Down
10. To take responsibility for shortcomings related to awarding methodology and management of Tour contracts (Briars employment, TV, Streaming rights, partnerships/sponsorships).
9. To demonstrate accountability and the lack of legitimacy given recent Board election shenanigans.
8. Poor attendance at Board Meetings.
7. Potential conflicts of interest related to PSA travel expenditures and inappropriate use of player e-mail address information to promote business interests.
6. Many current Board Members have had more than enough time on the Board (some with 9 or more years of service) to provide their ideas, perspectives and to influence the game.
5. The current Board does not reflect the geographic diversity of the PSA Tour.
4. The current Board could be strengthened by participation and representation of broader array of stakeholders.
3. They would send a clear message of change, renewal possible within the PSA Board & Executive.
2. Board members who step down would be demonstrating a true love of the game and putting what is in the best interests of the sport ahead of any personal considerations.
1. New members could be added that would bring fresh blood, new ideas, enriched Boardroom dynamics, varied skills, different business connections and networks.
It is far too easy to simply criticize from the sidelines or bitch over a beer, so I felt it important that I put forward some ideas, to be part of the solution as it were.
Some ideas to improve the PSA Board:
- have a maximum term length for new Board members of 5 years
- increase the size of the Board by 2 members
- have 1 seat for a Promoter representative (rotating)
- have 1 seat for an Associations representative (rotating)
- regionalize the structure to include a minimum of one Board seat or Executive position for each of:
UK Europe
North, Central & South America
Middle East, Africa & South Asia
Asia & Ocenia
* with a maximum of no more than 2 Board seats or Executive positions from one country.
- publish Board Meeting:
Agendas in advance to garner wider ranging feedback and ideas
Attendance records
- utilize web delivery technologies to increase attendance and participation at AGM and other Board meetings
- increase participation, level of engagement, robustness of decision making and pace of change by utilizing committees (to also include people outside Board and player population) to examine issues and make recommendations
Generally speaking I felt:
With a new CEO and several new Board members the PSA would have many of the ingredients for change, renewal and a fresh start. Would players like Thierry Lincou, Wael El Hindi or Amr Shabana improve the Board by more accurately reflecting the geographic diversity of the game? Might these or other players also provide a modern player's perspective, as well as bring fresh energy, ideas, skills and business connections to the Board Room?
Despite the personal and professional repercussions I then asked:
Are all of the Board Members below the best people to take the PSA Tour forward?
Which of the [following] gentlemen will show the character and true dedication for what is best for the game and voluntarily step down from the Board?
The PSA Board - when this article first published in April
Name Title Appointment Country
Mark Chaloner Chairman of the Board 07/12/2002 England
Alex Gough President 07/12/2002 Wales
Lee Beachill Vice President 12/01/2008 England
Robert Graham Treasurer 01/12/1998 England
Tony Hands Director 01/12/1998 England
John F Herrick Director 08/11/1994 U.S.A.
Martin Macdonnell Director 07/12/2002 Ireland
The current PSA Board
Name Title Appointment Country
Mark Chaloner Chairman of the Board 07/12/2002 England
Lee Beachill Vice President 12/01/2008 England
Robert Graham Treasurer 01/12/1998 England
Tony Hands Director 01/12/1998 England
Martin Macdonnell Director 07/12/2002 Ireland
Robert Bramall Director 05/22/2008 England
Renan Lavigne Director France
Current PSA Executives
Richard Graham Chief Executive England
Alex Gough Chief Operating Officer Wales
Ted Wallbutton Marketing Executive England
Sheila Cooksley Tour Executive Wales
A number of sources have indicated that further resignations from the Board will permit changes to the Board of the PSA. Look for Peter Nicol and Ziad Al-Turki to be added to the Board.
Peter and Ziad bring obvious legitimacy, perspectives and skills to the Board, but some questions remain:
1. Despite the "new" faces on the PSA Board, does the Board, Executive still tend to be overweighted in retired/pro players and individuals raised or resident in the United Kingdom?
2. Where is the representation on the Board/Executive from North America, Oceania, Asia, South America?
3. Is there a UK-centric approach to the management, operation of the PSA? Looking to the operators of the PSA website and web streaming service again we see UK based partners.
4. Would be interesting to examine the geographic breakdown of PSA:
- player nationality
- prize money
Wonder if the PSA Board, Management, Staff, Head Office, partner, suppliers are indicative of the international nature of the PSA, professional sport, business and sponsorship opportunities?
What do you think? Send me an e-mail to
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
or add a comment below.
 |
I'd be interested to know what skill set each of the board members bring to the table and what their areas of responsibility are within the organisation? Why are the PSA and WISPA separate? Surely they both do the same roll for their members. Isn't this a duplication of skills and costs and in addition, diluting the quality of management in both organisations? I think everybody recognises the importance of both the male and female players to the success of the sport. Is the separation of these organisations causing a disproportionate prize pool and marketing the sport as lacking equality for women? I'm sure the difference in prizemoney would have been noticed by the IOC.
I'd like to see a bit of transparency / accountability so that no passengers can sit in chairs. The marketing of the sport seems to be a bit off. What exactly is their charter because it appears to me that they simply register players, control and promote tournaments, world rankings and prize money?
To my knowledge there is absolutely no promotion of the sport in Australia and the national body (to me) seems to have little influence over players and their responsibility to promote the game. Surely there should be a promotional payroll and a junket of players doing exhibition matches in shopping malls, at universities and schools throughout the world. The club players would love to see internationals play locally, but no club has the resources to payroll this sort of promotion, much less have access to top players or transportable courts. They're all so busy fighting and poaching each others players that they could never organise anything that could promote the sport outside their own club.
Perhaps for an area to qualify for an exhibition, the district clubs should have to maintain a 90% PSA club membership from within their competitions. This would fund the whole thing and could grow the sport everywhere. I think this is the sort of promotion the board should be coordinating. If they had one of these junkets in each international region with a mix of international and local players participating, the money would be rolling in the door in the form of sponsorships and memberships. These junkets could become a well paid gig for the players, thus supporting more players on the tour and also increasing the public exposure of local players. Every club would then become a collection agent for PSA. I think the international organisations need to take responsibility to promote club level squash for the financial support to flow back the other way.
I share your frustrations and the lack of solutions coming from the top.
Good luck with the next chapter of your life and I wish you the success you deserve?
Regards
Paul