To South African cricket chief Joe Pamensky on future tours to South Africa during the Apartheid era, April 1978.
‘Unfortunately I am despondent in believing (as I have always said) that although your cricketers have done everything you can in S.A., ... countries will now come out with the verdict, the political verdict, that they can’t play in S.A. so long as Apartheid is Gov’t policy. Regrettable too, our Prime Minister, gives the impression he thinks the same way ...
“I think you will get a good and sympathetic hearing from the cricket fraternity in London but what use is that if the powers that be won’t let tours take place ...
The subject is now so political that I can’t see us playing in S.A. ... we have the problem of our Gov’t, the unions and the demos.``
As South Australian delegate to the Australian Cricket Board
to ACB Chairman Bob Parish on the subject of player payments, October 1973.
‘... the S.A. delegates ... were firm in their view that $20. p.day was ample remuneration, and ... they thought the allowances to manager and captain were adequate.
... For Sheffield Shield matches I think your suggestion is as good as one could devise. It is a big slice to give the players 50% of the cake but if it saves us paying more or establishing a fund, it may pay off. If this eventuates, God only knows what will happen in the first season after wards sponsorship is withdrawn. The players will still expect the same and they won’t be worrying about where the money comes from.``
To Bob Parish on the threat of Kerry Packer’s World Series Cricket, March 1978.
‘I would not willingly support any move to have government interference in T.V. rights which may control Packer because, as I have said many times before, it would inevitably bring control of the fees that might be paid.
“Re The Media. I agree your remarks. There is no doubt the Packer protagonists are cleverly using the press for propaganda purposes. I see no clear cut solution but I believe the only hope is for you, personally, to see the executive heads of all these papers, privately, and explain the position to them and ask for their support in the interests of national cricket. And I think it ought to be done well in advance of next summer.
To Bob Parish on the subject of bowlers throwing, February 1969.
‘But I think it germane to say that throwing has been a recurring evil for nearly 100 years and if modern legislators can devise ways and means of curing this evil once and for all, they will do cricket a great service.
Moreover I think it is powerful evidence in support of my view that we would be crazy now to revert to the old situation where we had no definition.”
... I don’t need to tell you of the heated arguments that went on about Griffiths and Meckiff and I’m sure you agree that there ought to be some yardstick whereby such arguments can be settled...
Here we are trying to settle a principle – something vital to cricket in all countries for all time. Nobody doubts that our definition is clear cut and that anyone obeying it would bowl fairly. BUT IT IS REFUSED BECAUSE ENGLAND HAS FOUND JUST THE ODD CASE WHICH THEY SAY MIGHT BE JUDGED UNFAIRLY.
To Bob Parish on David Hookes and his involvement with World Series Cricket and Kerry Packer, March 1978.
‘David Hookes won the “Sportsman of the year” award here last night on channel 9. He was interviewed and asked direct by Michael Charlton “With hind sight, would you do the same again”? David replied “I can’t very well answer that – I am on
But he went on to say the “younger” members of the Packer troup sincerely believed there should be a get together between the parties and clearly he is feeling his position very keenly....
To Bob Parish on the subject of punishment for Rod Marsh after a swearing incident, April 1976.
‘... I now understand that the Board members as a whole have agreed that Marsh be severely reprimanded. No doubt this decision was arrived at simply because under all the circumstances the Board could not, in practical terms, do anything else. But I’m certain no Board member feels that Marsh has been adequately dealt with