My article on Saturday 14th February titled : "Hybrid" style of voting in MCA election creates "surprises" tantamounting to a "unity" Committee, had its fair share of comments. In that article i talked about the "floaters", who maneuvered their votes to determine the fate of a number of candidates. The so called "bloc" votes crumpled for certain positions, reflecting the strategy adopted by the "floaters". In the process a "unity" Committee was created. Many disbelieve that this is not by design but sheer coincidence, although i think otherwise.
Since the election various interested parties are doing their post-mortem. All these are unofficial but still many want to know who are the so called strategists and also the "floaters". The aspect of "floaters" in the main has been identified but the issue of strategists is still a questionable matter. People believe that the names "thrown" in and identified seem to give too much of credit for these people's intellect. This is where the aspect of "not by design" hypothesis has come into being.
While the jury is still deciding on that issue, the definite aspect is the "floaters". The belief is that 2 of the new office-bearers seem to be on the suspect list and I honestly believe life for them in cricket may not be easy. The opinion of a "sell out" seems to be the foundation of the prevailing discussions. The argument is that such people have literally been involved in the whole exercise of the "bloc" votes and yet for their own self interest purpose they seem to have ditched the line-up in the eleventh hour. Indeed, some indicate that they enjoyed the food, drinks and even accommodation on other peoples expense and then "dump" them. Is it proper for people to act like that? Where are the moral standards?
Some think that "the battle maybe over but the war is far from finished". If there is any truth to this then I am concerned that cricket at national level may suffer. Development, I am not too worried as there are 2 or 3 parties undertaking it, although in the main and nationwide it seem to be only a single party. It is the level of co-operation and understanding that can be achieved is going to be the key question.
What is going to come to haunt some of the office bearers is their past actions. The negative karmic influence may put them in an awkward positions and make it difficult to discharge their duties. More so if the person holds a key position and requires support. If such things do take place then the difference widens and the problem may be difficult to redeem.
Obviously if the new Committee has the strength and support, such issues are trivial matters. Like most human beings the issue of trust would always linger on with certain parties and that itself would make it a hazardous journey. It is essentially how the rebuilding process i.e "repairing the fences" is undertaken. If it is not addressed and swept under the carpet, a small "spark" may create a burning "inferno". It comes down to the leadership and what they want to do for the next 2 years. If they want to follow the past, I think we can bid farewell to Malaysian cricket now itself.
There is some form of "unity" Committee and how unified the rest can fall in, would determine the combined effort everyone puts in to allow Malaysian cricket to flourish. Can we forgive and forget and move forward? This is in the hands of the people who can make the difference.