Six underdeveloped points brought down Rose

Feb 16, 2011 Sports

---

By Edison Jefford
Six underdeveloped points and lots of grassroots campaigning brought to power new officials in the administration of basketball in Georgetown, and from the look of the one-page document and election attitude of Trevor Rose, two central references are necessary.
In an early analysis of the transition of the Georgetown Amateur Basketball Association (GABA), one cannot help but notice the nonchalance of Rose in being re-elected, and what can be called the “underdeveloped points (Focus Areas) of the new administration”.
We will deal with one at a time. First, one gets the feeling that the former President, Rose had enough with the lack of support from his Executives, which became evident when he chose not to present a slate at the GABA Annual General Meeting and Elections.
It could not have been that Rose was unable to find anyone to run with him in the elections since he is a well-known businessman in the fashion industry. He also has loads of influence among an emerging young bourgeois class in and out of Georgetown.
Something simply did not add up with Rose’s attitude toward the election. Apart from not presenting a slate, Rose did not campaign among the clubs. It could not have been that he underestimated his support-base because he knew he was not popular among some clubs.
All that pointed in one direction: Rose was not interested in being re-elected, but more importantly, the question must be asked, are there undisclosed phantom undercurrents that plague the administrators of basketball in Georgetown?
If you ask Rose that question, he will tell you that his business has become far more demanding given his recent personal circumstances. He will not give you an answer that will expose some of the intricacies of the management of the Georgetown sub-association.
What has become clearer over the years of the GABA’s existence, though, is that it is a problematic association to manage. In the recent past, before Rose, Chris Bowman did not enjoy the best of times at the helm of the country’s main basketball nerve.
So how will the new administrators of the sport in the City do? We do not know much just yet, but what we do know are six points that they presented as their ‘manifesto’, if you want to call it that, at the AGM and Elections at the National Gymnasium on Sunday.
We cannot assess the performance of the new David Carto-led administration because the fact is that they need time to initiate their programmes and implement their vision. We can, however, look on the surface at the points they presented before Georgetown clubs.
Such a serious document that was suppose to have been the blueprint for the further development of the sport in Georgetown took the new Executive three-quarters of a page for six points that are clearly underdeveloped in any analysis’s prognosis.
The first point was “strengthening the structure and organisation of the clubs”; the text of what was said generally had to do with clubs being able to establish structures that include the relevant offices such as President Etc.
The new Executive plans to assist clubs in attaining such structures in Georgetown. The absence of methodology on this goal was clear.
The second point was “increasing the participation of youths in the sport”; this was another one-paragraphed point that basically indicated that the new team will corporate with stakeholders to get the sport back into the schools and communities so that both nurseries can provide players for the clubs affiliated to the Georgetown sub-association. Again this point lacked process, for example, will the new Executive be collaborating with the Ministry of Education or the National Schools’ Basketball Festival to move this goal forward?
The third point was “garnering sponsorship for infrastructure development”; this was one of the well documented and initiated visions of Rose. The new Executive’s outline took just three lines in a document that convinced nine clubs to vote on its behalf.
The fourth point was “ranking of club”; through the organisation of Division I, II and III events, the current administration wants to have clubs seeded. There were already Division I and III Leagues in Georgetown with clubs being seeded thereafter. Again this point is not necessarily innovative and fresh. Rose had gone this way in his two years as GABA President.
The fifth point was “training and development”; this has to do with hosting seminars and sessions for officials, namely coaches and statisticians to improve their level. This point was outlined in two lines in the document titled “Focus Areas” for the new Executive.
The last point was the “increased involvement of clubs”; the new Executive plans to meet on a regular basis with affiliated clubs.
Of the six points that the new Executive presented, only two were original ideas; those were the “strengthening of the structure and organisation of the clubs” and the “increased involvement of clubs”; the others were part of the vision of previous administrations, including Rose’s.
Gatekeepers of the sport in Georgetown simply cannot take six underdeveloped points seriously, but that is as much as we know about the new GABA for now. What follows is completely up to the new administrators, but it will surely decide whether they succeed or fail.

---

---