Dear Editor,
It is nothing short of astonishing to watch the President of Cricket West Indies, Mr. Kishore Shallow, step before the media to defend what has clearly been an abysmal coaching record under Daren Sammy. But what is even more troubling—and frankly unbelievable—is that Mr. Shallow seems convinced that his own leadership record somehow gives him the moral authority to make such a defence.
Let us be honest:
You cannot defend failure when your own presidency is defined by it.
Under Mr. Shallow’s leadership, West Indies cricket has not taken meaningful steps forward—on or off the field. We continue to witness inconsistency, poor strategic direction, declining performances, and an alarming absence of any long-term plan capable of restoring confidence. Instead of accountability, we are handed excuses. Instead of progress, we are fed public relations spin. Instead of a revival, we are watching stagnation tighten its grip.
And now, the situation becomes even more difficult to justify:
Mr. Shallow has accepted a seat as a Member of Parliament in St. Vincent & the Grenadines—while still serving as President of Cricket West Indies.
This is an unprecedented conflict of roles. How can one effectively lead a regional sporting institution in crisis while simultaneously taking on the demanding duties of national political office? The optics are terrible, the priorities are questionable, and the message to players, staff, and fans is unmistakable:
West Indies cricket is not his primary focus.
So when Mr. Shallow steps forward to defend Coach Daren Sammy—despite Sammy’s clear record of underperformance in all formats—it feels less like leadership and more like a strategic shield for his own shortcomings. Because if Sammy’s results are acceptable, then so are Shallow’s. And that is exactly the problem.
Leadership requires standards.
Leadership requires transparency.
Leadership requires accountability.
What we are witnessing instead is a President doubling down on mediocrity, lowering expectations, and rewarding underperformance at every level of management. This is not protecting West Indies cricket—this is suffocating it.
If Mr. Shallow wishes to defend Coach Sammy, then he must answer a far more fundamental question:
What has he personally achieved during his presidency that grants him the credibility to judge anyone else’s performance?
Until West Indies cricket demands higher standards from those at the very top, the results on the field will continue to reflect the dysfunction, poor judgement, and lack of accountability at the administrative level.
West Indies cricket deserves better. The fans deserve better. The players deserve better. And the region deserves leadership—not excuses.