Two years ago the British National Team had to withdraw its participation at the Final Olympic Qualifying event in Taiwan due to a lack of funding. While a start at the 2010 European Championship in Germany doesn’t seem in danger, Mister-Baseball.com has learned that the British Baseball Federation (BBF) apparently at the moment doesn’t have significant funds available for the EC budget of the national team. As consequence General Manager Alan Smith and Head Coach Stephan Rapaglia will resign by February 28th and have sent a proposal to the BBF board, which includes suggestions to help solving the problem.
Smith and Rapaglia are willing to serve as volunteer consultant/assistant to their successors in 2010, return to their posts in 2011 or serve to the Baseball program in a different capacity if the BBF Board wishes to continue the partnership. These intentions however depend on if the BBF Board adopts the mentioned proposal and that both are on the same page with the BBF Board regarding the selection of their successors.
Main points of aforementioned proposal:
- The BBF Board continues to recognize that the ability of the GB National Team to compete at the highest levels in European and International Baseball is of great importance to the development of Baseball in Great Britain.
- By eliminating the salary for the head coach position the board could save £5,000 in 2010, which partly should be committed to the EC budget.
- National team players would have to be required to contribute to the costs for their participation in the EC.
- Sponsorship/funding money from any sources should be used to reduce the player contributions to the EC budget.
- Players and staff members shall be allowed to earn commissions on any money they secure through own fund raising initiatives.
- After approval of the EC budget by the BBF board, the national team staff would be allowed to make preparation and tournament plans without further approval by the board.
- The National Team Head Coach will be allowed to choose his coaching staff and the EC roster with 25 percent being players based in Great Britain.
- The BBF Board will assist the national team actively prior the EC.
Smith and Rapaglia also make recommendations for potential successors. They suggest that the BBF Board chooses from the pool of the assistant coaches on the GB staff during the 2009 Baseball World Cup. They are naming Brant Ust, Charlie Sullivan and Brian Cleary as potential candidates.
This is Stephan and Alan playing the game where they have actually presented three versions of their resignation to the BBF Board who by the way actually have provided more funds than they requested. Mr. Smith and Stephan have asked the BBF Board to provide funding for the next four years @ £30,000.00 per year. They have no clue but expect a Membership to accept this proposal?
It should be also mentioned that Liam Carroll before his resignation as National Teams Officer on the BBF Board actually voted in favour not to fund this request
The BBF Membership was hoodwinked into paying Repaglia’s contract as a service provider which was only found out last Feb. This contract was illegal because the BBF President Rob Rance and the BBF Secretary withheld this information from the rest of the BBF Board and it was presented to the Members as GB Funding which they agreed to help fund. If the BBF Member had of been asked to pay the Rapaglia contract , most likely the BBF Members would have rejected all Funding for a team that does nothing for the BBF Membership.
It is no surprise the BBF Board has had a rash of resignation’s of late and the Membership will have many questions for those people who quit only because they were found out.
Alan Smith and Stephan Rapaglia are hungry to feed their egos at the expense of the British Baseball Federation Members. The BBF does not benefit from this program and young players are leaving the game in numbers because they will not have any chances to play senior baseball for Great Britain, so why should the Members fund their dream? Who really cares about the WBC other than Alan Smith and Stephan Rapaglia because it will not improve the program?
Decide for yourself
Dear BBF Board Members,
Alan and I are writing this letter to follow up on our 24 January letter to the Board (a copy of which is pasted below for reference). We have not yet received a formal response from the Board, and it is our understanding from communications with individual members of the Board that a formal response may be difficult for the Board to timely generate as a result of (i) the fact that the Board is currently short-handed, (ii) the Board’s current focus on preparing for the impending AGM and (iii) differences of opinion within the Board regarding the future of the GB programme. Given these issues, Alan and I wish to make it easier for the Board to provide a quick response. Accordingly, at this time, we request that the Board simply adopt or reject the following statement of intent:
“While the BBF Board does not currently have sufficient funding available to commit significant monies toward the GB Senior team’s 2010 EC budget, the Board recognises that the continuing ability of the GB Senior team to compete at the highest levels of European and world baseball is of great importance to the development of domestic baseball within Britain. Accordingly, the Board is committed to supporting the GB Senior team’s efforts to compete at the highest levels of European and world baseball. More specifically, at this time, the Board is willing to agree to the following measures:
1. By eliminating the GB Senior team head coach’s salary, the Board will save £5,000 in 2010 alone. Of this savings, not less than £3000 shall be committed to the GB Senior team’s 2010 EC budget. Additionally, the £500 that Stephan Rapaglia previously allocated to the funding of scholarships for GB youth baseball players shall instead be allocated to the EC budget.
2. In the absence of sufficient external funding, Senior players will inevitably be required to contribute towards the cost of their participation in the 2010 EC. Such contributions shall, however, be limited strictly to the maximum necessary to cover the costs specific to those trips and shall not be used to fund any other elements within the GB programme or within the Board’s budget.
3. Subject to the commission concept set forth in item 4 below, any sponsorship/funding monies obtained from any sources in 2010 for the GB Senior team shall be used to reduce the required player contributions to the EC budget, until such player contributions have been reduced to no more than £250 per player.
4. Senior players and staff shall be allowed to earn commissions on any monies they secure through their own fundraising initiatives. The commission amounts shall be subject to a sliding scale dependent on the amounts raised. For example, a player or staff member may earn a commission of 25% on the first £1,000 that he raises, and 10% on any monies raised in excess of £1,000. More details will follow.
5. Once the Board has approved the 2010 EC budget, the Senior team staff shall be allowed the flexibility to make preparation and tournament plans without further Board approval, as long as the Board-approved 2010 EC budget is not exceeded.
6. The Board gives the Senior team GM discretion to manage GB Senior team assets, including, for 2010 EC budget purposes, the option to sell such assets as he/she deems appropriate.
7. The Board gives the Senior team head coach discretion to appoint his/her coaching staff for the 2010 EC.
8. The Board gives the Senior team head coach discretion to determine the roster for the 2010 EC, but the Board recommends that not less than 25% of the roster consist of Britain-based players.
9. The Board agrees that if the Senior team GM or any member of the Senior team coaching staff were to be dismissed by the Board prior to the end of the 2010 EC, a severance payment of £500 shall be provided to such dismissed individual.
10. The Board shall provide active assistance to the Senior team prior to the 2010 EC. Such assistance shall include, but not be limited to, the submission of subscription forms by the required deadlines, and active assistance in seeking sponsorship and/or external funding.”
To make it clear that Alan and I are proposing the foregoing solely for what we perceive to be the good of the GB programme, and also to provide the incoming Board with a clean slate in terms of Senior team staffing, Alan and I hereby resign from our respective positions as of 28 February, 2010.
If, however, the incoming Board wishes for either or both of us to remain involved with the GB programme after 28 February, each of us may be willing to (i) serve as a volunteer consultant/assistant to our successor in 2010, (ii) return to our position in 2011 and/or (iii) serve the GB programme in some other mutually acceptable role. Our willingness to do so is conditioned on the Board’s adoption of the statement above and on our approval of the Board-designated successors, interim or otherwise, to our respective positons.
In terms of the next Senior team head coach, regardless of whether the Board is interested in keeping us involved with the GB programme, we strongly recommend that the Board select solely from among the baseball-specific assistant coaches on the 2009 BWC staff (i.e., Brant Ust, Charlie Sullivan and Brian Cleary). Each of these men is extremely well-qualified for the position, and, given the excellent relationship that each enjoys with the players within the GB programme, each will have a better chance of preserving a strong roster for the 2010 EC than virtually any other candidate. Additionally, Brant, Charlie and Brian are all first-class individuals who will bring credit to the programme. If the Board wishes us to recruit any of these individuals as the next head coach of the GB Senior team, it would be our pleasure and privilege to attempt to do so.
Finally, Alan and I wish the outgoing and incoming BBF Boards much success in all endeavours relating to British baseball, and we each hope to have the opportunity to continue to serve the GB programme in the future.
Sincerely,
Stephan Rapaglia
Alan Smith
Dear Liam,
Thank you for the emails you sent to us individually. Since we have always worked closely together, and continue to share the same values and aspirations for the GB baseball programme and specifically for the GB senior team, we have decided to respond jointly to all items with the exception of the specifics of the reduced budget, which Alan has addressed separately.
First, we would like to thank the BBF for having appointed us to be part of the GB programme. We were honoured to have been given the opportunity to lead the senior team for the past six years and we are proud of the team’s achievements during that period. We also appreciate the board’s recognition of our service, but we are dismayed to note the board’s vision for the future of the programme.
We are particularly concerned about the board’s apparent willingness to give up on high-level international competition at the senior level. We understand that the board’s view is that there is simply no funding available, and that the board’s position merely reflects this reality. Our view, however, is that while such a position may seem practical, we consider it to be short-sighted and believe that other options should be explored.
One important reason for this belief is that the GB senior team stands a realistic chance of being selected to take part in the World Baseball Classic when it expands from 16 to 24 teams in 2013. Such selection would bring unprecedented exposure to British baseball and provide greatly increased opportunities for funding and/or sponsorship to the entire programme. And, if GB takes part in the WBC, all the costs will be supported by Major League Baseball, so this will be a win-win situation for the BBF and the sport in Britain. However, this will only happen if the team can remain sufficiently competitive through the European Championships this year to qualify for the next IBAF World Cup and retain or improve on its current world ranking of 21.
In part because of this very real possibility, we believe that the board should be willing to do whatever it takes to help the senior team continue to compete, at least for the immediate future, at the highest international levels. And, it is worth noting that we are not talking about huge sums. Many of our European competitor nations have much greater budgets, but based on our years of experience we believe that somewhere around £30,000 per annum would be sufficient for the senior team to sustain its momentum. After all, we have suffered from ever-declining funding over the last several years, but we have managed to move steadily forward nevertheless. The bottom line is that with modest financial support, the programme can (a) continue to compete successfully within Europe, (b) continue to earn international recognition including, potentially, a place in the next WBC, and (c) serve thereby to bring greater visibility and attention to the sport within Britain.
It is unfortunate that prior opportunities to take advantage of the senior team’s international standing to bring greater domestic visibility and attention to the sport and secure the funding necessary to sustain the programme have not been taken. However, such an opportunity still exists. GB’s recent advancement to the second round of the World Cup, its status as defending silver medallist in the 2010 EC, its current world ranking of 21, and above all the chance of securing a WBC place mean GB continues to enjoy a high profile that can still be exploited. We urge the board to seize this opportunity.
If, however, the board decides to maintain its current stance, we find it hard to see how this will result in any benefit to the GB programme or to the domestic game. Given this, we very much hope that the board will agree to try to find a way to provide the support mentioned above or some other way to allow the programme to go forward on a competitive basis. In light of the above, we urge the board to consider adopting the majority of the following proposals:
FINANCIAL
BBF funding: By eliminating the head coach salary, the board will save £5K in 2010 alone, some of which savings should be used to support the programme. The board has already suggested that it may fund one or two flights for the head coach, and the board should commit to funding these flights. Additionally, the £500 that Stephan previously allocated to the funding of scholarships could instead be allocated to the senior team budget for 2010. The goal behind these suggestions is to increase the possibility that a pre-EC preparation period could occur and/or that required player contribution amounts could be decreased. Furthermore, in recognition of its previously stated view that providing increased opportunities for GB youth is one of the justifications for altering the direction of the senior team, the board should also allocate a portion of that saving specifically to the junior team budget for 2010.
External funding: The first portion of any corporate or governmental sponsorship/funding should be used exclusively to reduce the required player contributions rather than be used to carry a surplus. Furthermore, any such funding in excess of the sum necessary to eliminate player contributions in any given year should be used to help provide some remuneration to the head coach and GM.
Player contributions: In the absence of sufficient external funding, senior players will inevitably be required to contribute towards the cost of their attendance at GB events. Such contributions should, however, be limited strictly to the maximum necessary to cover the costs specific to those trips and should not be used to fund any other elements within the programme or within the board’s budget.
Member fundraising: Senior players, staff and possibly ex-players should be allowed to earn commissions on any monies they secure through individual fundraising initiatives. The amounts they retain would be subject to an agreed sliding scale dependent on the amounts raised.
MANAGEMENT
Financial management: Once the board has approved the annual budget the senior team staff should be allowed the flexibility to make preparation and tournament plans without further board approval, as long as the board-approved draft budget is not exceeded.
Asset management: The board should allow the GM discretion to manage GB senior team assets including, for budget purposes, the option to sell such assets as he/she deems appropriate.
Coaching staff: The board should allow the senior team head coach discretion to appoint his/her coaching staff on an annual basis. In addition, the senior team GM and head coach should have some advisory input regarding the appointment of staff at youth levels in the national programme.
Rosters: The board should allow the senior team head coach discretion to determine the rosters for senior team events, and should not mandate player eligibility requirements for formal international events at the senior level, other than as dictated by event rules. N.B. The board, the senior team head coach and the senior team GM should work together to establish appropriate development-oriented guidelines for rosters for specific events.
Severance payments: The fact that the entire GB programme staff will henceforth serve on a volunteer basis means that the staff members will be at greater risk of arbitrary dismissal by the board. To provide some security against arbitrary dismissal, if any members of the programme staff were to be dismissed by the board prior to the end of any formal international event scheduled for any given year, limited severance payments (e.g., £500) and reimbursement of any previously-incurred expenses should be provided.
BBF support: The board should provide active assistance in seeking specific forms of support to the programme. This should include, but not be limited to, the submission of subscription forms and entry fees for international events by the required deadlines, and active assistance in seeking sponsorship and/or external funding. To streamline the process, and to reduce the workload of the NTO and the GB staff, the board should consider the formation of sub-committees (with delegated decision-making authority) to assist with such matters.
Ultimately, regardless of our continuing involvement with the GB programme, we strongly urge the board to reconsider its position. Either the board can make the tough choice and commit to supporting the programme at a competitive level and using it to benefit the domestic game, or the board can continue on its stated course, which is likely to seriously compromise the progress made to date and significantly lower the programme’s standing – and that of the BBF – in international baseball.
We look forward to receiving the board’s response so we can make an informed decision about whether or not we feel able to continue in our current positions.
Alan Smith and Stephan Rapaglia
Dear Alan,
During the BBF Board’s conference call of December 19, 2009, the Board recognised your contribution to the National Teams Programme and successes during international competition. The Board would prefer to retain your services as General Manager (GM) of the national team should you be willing to continue in the role as a volunteer with your expenses paid.
The Board recognises that your involvement with Great Britain Baseball has been based on a commitment to compete at the highest levels of international competition. It should be made clear that the ability of the programme to compete at such high levels as in recent years may be sacrificed in order that the BBF have no financial risks associated with the operation of the senior national team in 2010.
The Board has decided that due to financial restrictions it cannot support the budget you provided for 2010. Although a new budget has not as yet been finalised, unless external funding is found, player contributions of approximately £1,000 each have been tentatively agreed as the sole finances, meaning that the budget should equal approximately £24,000.
The Board, while wanting to send a strong team to the European Championships, recognises that the player contribution amount may limit the calibre of the team that can be assembled.
While the Board understands that preparation event(s) will increase the team’s chances of success at the European Championships, there is no confidence that a commitment can be made to the preparation event in Belgium considering the current financial status of the programme.
Considering the BBF’s decision to limit the budget as noted above, and that this will affect the operations of the programme, the Board requests that you confirm whether or not you are willing to continue in the role of GM.
If you have any questions about the information contained herein or separate, please let me know.
On behalf of the BBF Board,
Liam Carroll
National Teams Programme Official
British Baseball Federation
Dear Stephan,
During the BBF Board’s conference call of December 19, 2009, the Board determined that it will be unable to fulfil the contracted payment of £6,500 (of which £5k is from the BBF and £1.5K from the National Team.)
Therefore, the Board is seeking either termination or renegotiation of the contract. Recognising your contribution to the National Teams Programme and successes during international competition, the Board would prefer to retain your services as head coach of the national team should you be willing to stay in the role as a volunteer with some expenses paid – the Board has agreed to provide airfare for one or two trips, depending on finance, for the European Championships and possibly a preparatory event.
The Board recognises that your involvement with Great Britain Baseball has been based on a commitment to compete at the highest levels of international competition. It should be made clear that the ability of the programme to compete at such high levels as in recent years may be sacrificed in order that the BBF have no financial risks associated with the operation of the senior national team in 2010.
The Board has decided that due to financial restrictions it cannot support the budget Alan Smith provided for 2010. Although a new budget has not as yet been finalised, unless external funding is found, player contributions of approximately £1,000 each have been tentatively agreed as the sole finances, meaning that the budget should equal approximately £24,000.
The Board, while wanting to send a strong team to the European Championships, recognises that the player contribution amount may limit the calibre of the team that can be assembled.
While the Board understands that preparation event(s) will increase the team’s chances of success at the European Championships, there is no confidence that a commitment can be made to the preparation event in Belgium considering the current financial status of the programme.
Considering the BBF’s decision not to finance a paid head coach position in 2010, and the additional information that will affect the operations of the programme, the Board requests that you confirm whether you will renegotiate the contract, or if moves toward terminating the contract need to be made.
If you have any questions about the information contained herein or separate, please let me know.
On behalf of the BBF Board,
Liam Carroll
National Teams Programme Official
British Baseball Federation