Holding critical of West Indies board president

Ken Gordon, the president of the West Indies cricket board, has came under heavy fire from Michael Holding, the legendary West Indian fast bowler. Holding's criticism comes in the wake his resignation from the cricket committee of the board after expressing unhappiness with a few of their policies.

"From [the time] this man has been in the leadership of the West Indies Cricket Board, too many questions have been asked about what he has said and what is actually the case. But I have to question [that]," Holding said in Starcom Network's Another View programme presented by Simon Crosskill, a leading journalist based in Jamaica.

Holding also stated he would not get involved in West Indies cricket again until Gordon departed. "It would be great if that man was no longer around. I would get more involved, and more formally involved, officially involved. But there is no way I am going to get officially involved in West Indies cricket again with that man around the place."

And Crosskill outlined three main reasons why Holding would have formed his opinion on Gordon. When Gordon became president, he changed the terms of reference for the Cricket Committee, leading to Holding and Clive Lloyd withdrawing. Secondly, Gordon and the WICB failed to reach an agreement with billionaire Allen Stanford over the US$5million 20/20 match against South Africa because of a conflict of dates with the Pakistan Futures Tours.

Gordon reportedly told Stanford the Pakistan Cricket Board wouldn't budge over the dates, and also indicated the WICB didn't name the tour squad because of a request by captain Brian Lara to encourage players to fight for a spot. That was the final straw for Holding, who tendered his resignation.

"But when Holding resigned, Ken Gordon wrote to him saying that Lara and the selectors agreed that the squad for Pakistan shouldn't be chosen right now, but when Holding consulted the selectors Andy Roberts and Clyde Butts, they confirmed they had no discussion with Lara on the matter," Crosskill added. "So either Gordon in his letter to Holding was misinformed or he was being economical with the truth. Holding is in no doubt which it is."