The Wicked Cricket Column

The 5 year payments programme was presumably devised pre-coronavirus? If so, then surely all bets are off until we emerge from the pandemic?  

BTW, do you think Halsall is now doing the job we thought Greenfield was supposed to be doing? 

The Enigma: Keith Greenfield
__________________________________________________

(a personal penny’s worth)

Keith Greenfield, who will be 52 years-old in early December is, perhaps, the most controversial member of staff at Sussex CCC. Wiki states, “(His) career for Sussex spanned twelve years between 1987 until 1999. He played 78 first-class and 160 one-day matches for the county, scoring over 7,000 runs in total. A right-handed batsman, he was also an occasional right-arm medium bowler who picked up thirty-two wickets.

“He joined Sussex initially as part of a Youth Opportunities Scheme, progressing through the Second XI team and development squads until he was given a chance in the First XI. His career best, 154, came against Glamorgan. After his playing career ended he joined the administrative staff as Director of the Sussex Academy, being awarded a testimonial in 2004, followed by a promotion to Cricket Performance Manager in 2005.”



In January 2016, Greenfield was appointed the first Club Director of Cricket (DOC).

First, he was only made DOC because Mark Robinson turned the newly created position down. To save Zac Toumazi’s face, the obvious choice was Keith Greenfield as he had been already at Sussex CCCC for three decades, was friendly with the players and general staff, and knew where the skeletons were buried. I remember this Forum was particularly cruel, perhaps unfairly so, towards Greenfield after an early rather hapless and nervous interview he gave where, when asked to explain his role, he memorably said, “I drive around the county meeting people.”

I would describe Greenfield as the Club’s “Information Bagman”, for he is a glorified PA for Rob Andrew. He represents the adhesion that binds Sussex CCC together. He reports back to the CEO on the mindset of the 1st team players and the Academy - who may be unhappy, lazy or irresponsible, not developing as they should, as well as those who are. He liaises with the Team Coach and Academy Head to learn who deserves new contracts and who doesn’t, which youngsters are improving and which are not. Then there is the ECB and the liaising of cricketers like Jofra Archer, Chris Jordan, Phil Salt and Ollie Robinson. Nor forgetting the existing Club sponsors and general stakeholders... If you like, the DOC is the eyes and ears for Andrew. He fills in the gaps, letting the CEO know how the club is running. At such a difficult financial time, having an “information bagman” is an important asset for a Chief Exec.

The problem with this is the DOC’s mindset, his interpretation of what he sees, the close relationships he may have with particular players… there will be a bias in what the DOC reports back. And so, Greenfield’s role has an important influence over the Club’s successes and failures, development and standing.

Therefore, it is understandable that Greenfield receives flak from supporters because he is the major vein that runs through and around the Club. His judgments will influence the CEO’s decisions. And given Greenfield has been at Sussex CCC for over three decades now, he has seen and been through the entire rollercoaster-ride of failure-success and now failure again. His energy is fully imprinted on Sussex CCC, so much so, that his influence is not to be underestimated.

Such people are usually subservient to their peers and why they remain popular with leadership. They are non-threatening to the status quo and express the Club’s core values and beliefs. Loyalty is a key element of Greenfield’s appeal too. He is not a thrusting, dynamic alpha-male. He is not going to radically change or alter the club’s path. Greenfield is the steady eddy, reliable, loyal information bagman, there to subtly influence the club and its culture. When a county is successful and winning trophies this is a blessing, but when one hits hard times where obvious, even radical changes, need to take place, such an individual can be a thorn in that required transformation, when the old energy clashes with the new.

For such people often have supporters within the club itself, who may hold similar core beliefs, who wish to hold on to their own power and influence within the club, where upsetting the status quo is not desired. And why people like Greenfield keep their power long-term as a loyal representative of that force.

In a nutshell, they are difficult people to remove and only via a coup like the 1997 Members Rebellion or an internal leadership battle, as seen at Derbyshire CCC with Chris Grant in 2011, can that core club energy transform. What is interesting at Sussex CCC, is that while the rebellion succeeded in bringing 10 years of incredible success, here we are 10 years later and back to square one. Like a cruel magnet, that ‘old force’ has returned once more.

Why is that? Why was the club unable to hold on to that ‘resonance of success?’ How has it been possible that leadership over the last 10 years has allowed this humiliating and excruciating decline to occur? To use a football analogy, when Bill Shankley took Liverpool from being a lowly second division club to becoming world beaters, on leaving, that ‘resonance of success’ not only remained, but grew stronger via new leadership. There was a determination and an ability to remain victorious, but not at Sussex CCC.

Some posters on this Forum suggest it is Greenfield who has thwarted Chris Adams’ hopes of returning to the club. While this is little more than hearsay, you can see why this is possible. Adams and Greenfield’s personalities are chalk and cheese. Two people could not be more different in their approach. But like in various organisations, the dynamic thrusting alpha-male personality is viewed as a threat to the status quo and those in power and why they are usually given the cold-shoulder.

The future, imho, lies with Rob Andrew. The one, perhaps, only opportunity the club has of turning their present misfortunes around. Yet, will he stay at Hove long-term? For today, the future of county cricket is not about success, but survival. And while supporters continue to dream of winning trophies once again, we must twiddle our thumbs and hope that “our promising youngsters” will perform miracles some time in the future.

Perhaps, come 2023, we should feel lucky that we still have a cricket county to follow and support. On the other hand..?