FlowerPower I think you're arguing against and lamenting a slightly different matter all-together. This is not about the pros and cons of a deliberate policy that seeks to advance a specific group, racism/reverse racism, or the radical tendencies of the people involved.
You should reread
Bayhaus' comment.
"I think its a sad coincidence that the directive had to come now. And with immediate effect. In the cricket context it seems a policy was especially crafted to stop Makoni as there seemed to be no other way. Am sure thats how he sees it. Potential to be problematic cos I don't see any black former players being selected cos of unavailability...And if there are any there may be calls of them just being token. And if there are none then it will seem there was some sort of coup....Why only selectors, our problems at Zc are far worse than just selection and if a policy is to be created it must address the whole system."
It's obvious that a few of these guys will be unavailable. Who wants white stooges Olonga and Mbangwa representing the Black cause? I don't, and neither do most people. The other guys are busy wrapping up their careers trying to make a living, even Taibu has embarked on something new that he's focused on. So as
Bayhaus pointed out this is a definite coup.
Makoni
has stated himself:
“Coltart was the mastermind of the black armband protest by Andy Flower and Henry Olonga (in the 2003 Cricket World Cup in South Africa). We fought for equality in the game because as blacks we were not getting equal opportunities as our white counterparts...Coltart promised fellow racists to restore the old order once he got into office and his grand plan is coming to its fruition now, but we will not allow that...Coltart was a member of the ‘royal family’ of untouchables who wanted to make sure black players were excluded. We fought that system and now we are giving everyone equal opportunity and they want to reverse the gains of the prevailing peace...We rebuilt cricket from scratch when white players walked out without any help from Coltart and now that he realises that the coalition government tenure is running out, he wants to leave a piece of regulation that returns control to the very same people who at one time attempted to collapse cricket simply because they were opposed to transformation,” Makoni said.
How can you expect sincere objectives to come out of such a man. In fact his role and position in the MDC split tells us a lot about what kind of a man he is.
The point is my friends, the ICC
didn't recommend that a selector be a former Test player, the minimum
was sufficient, recent FC playing experience:
- Review Cricket Committee composition and increase cricket expertise and experience on this Committee (including international playing experience);
- Ensure selectors have as recent first-class playing experience as possible and involve former international players as selectors;
- Remove Board Chairman‟s veto on selection; and
- Formalise the selectors‟ role in the process for appointing the captain by empowering the selectors with responsibility for nominating a captain and vice-captain for the approval of the Board
Makoni is right in saying
“It is not our fault that we didn’t play for the national team. It was because of the system and we cannot be further disadvantaged. What is so special about the game that somebody who has club cricket will fail to comprehend?” Even guys here at the ZCF select teams everyday, and they value their opinions highly, to the point of criticising coaches and selectors vehemently.
Why now Coltart? Food for thought guys. This is a deliberate racist strategy. The SRC (and Minister) may represent all sports, but at the end of the day only rugby, soccer and cricket are the team sports which matter(just like industry, you look here in SA agriculture, banking, mining plus IT & Communications are all under a firm white hold). They want to make sure that they hold key positions to direct policy. After tackling the selectors they will, according to outstanding ICC recommendations, wrest control of appointing the captain from the Board/Chairman, and give it to the selectors, to ensure that Brendon Taylor doesn't get fired from the job.
The minister was there when David Mutendera, who has more experience than Dube was fired, and Makoni, with less, was installed. Wayne James with just as much experience as Mutendera replaced Campbell.
In SA the biological weapons mastermind, who apparently was unaware were for wiping out Black people, was about to resign as president of CSA, suddenly he was convinced otherwise. A black selector was to be appointed, but nothing came of it. Nor did they enforce the number of Black Africans at all levels. A new 12 member board will be formed to consist of 5 independent directors, plus 7 out of the 11(affiliates). After which a further four directors would be added, two independent and two non-independent.
Crucially, all the new board members must be elected with a majority of more than 50% of the vote. In essence you've got affiliates already dominated by white interests.
Just like Coltart tactics, they've decided to start with 12, so that they see who are the four options who want to be added to the board and if they don't like them they won't get the 50%+ majority! That way their policies of suppression and marginalisation of Black players will not be disturbed since the board has great power in terms of policy. 
Judge Nicholson recommended an
11-member board which should include nine non-executive independent members. CSA,
initially agreed with Nicholson’s recommendations, but then changed tune and a better fit for the organisation would be a 5-5 split – with five independents, five non-independents – and a chief executive, which makes up an 11-member Board. However in practice they've done worse with a 7-5 split. SASCOC have always stated “sport must be run by sports people”, something in direct contrast to Nicholson’s findings about
professional sports administration needing experts from the legal fraternity and business community.
Unsurprisingly, the players union, the SA Cricketers Association(largely white as you'd expect), was largely satisfied with the outcome. “We were expecting a 7-5 split, which
was always going to happen to satisfy Sascoc’s demands,” said Saca chief executive Tony Irish.
Sascoc is like the SRC, which has Ellman-Brown. In this case
SASCOC, together with CSA, have connived to ensure that Blacks will for the long-term be excluded from strategic decision-making positions. If, as recommended by the Judge, the 11 member board made up of 9 independent directors, Blacks, Coloreds and Indians would have made the majority, and continued to vote each other into office.
Even with the exodus, Zimbabwe has a larger base of Black legal and business experts. If Coltart and the SRC adopt the CSA-SASCOC tactics, even ZC may end up wholly white. I wonder if that isn't the objective! If I remember correctly, they've already tried to cut off clubs which sprouted during this time by stating they need to have venues.
You guys should learn to read between the lines! It's not amazing that some here probably still think UN resolution 1441 on Lybia no-fly zone, was a sincere US-NATO project! I'd gladly buy you a return ticket to go and holiday in the beautiful 'liberated' beaches of Benghazi! Anyone?
One would have expected Coltart to be the one who uttered Makoni's words "
it is not the Black coaches/slectors/administrators' fault that they didn’t play FC cricket or for the national team. It was because of the system and I will not disadvantage them any further". Alas it wasn't to be. Morally he's a poorer man and weaker legal mind than Nicholson.
