They have been flying in for some time now, clearly visible to those who repeatedly warned of their approach but ignored-indeed, ignorantly encouraged-by those in positions to do something about it.
The signposts along the way to the present humiliation in South Africa were plentiful and distinct. Yet the West Indies Cricket Board, its members fearful of upsetting their own constituencies and divided among themselves, have taken no heed of them.
In the rare, and honest, acceptance of reality two years ago, it finally dropped the misleading word ``control'' that had been part of its title from its formation in 1927. The accuracy of that decision, however inadvertent, has become more and more evident, the final and irrefutable proof provided in a London Airport hotel in November.
The moment the Board acceded to their striking players' summons to Heathrow, 5,000 miles away from the headquarters of West Indies cricket in Antigua, it rendered itself more or less redundant.
On this tour, the players have asserted their own control everywhere but on the field. Having gained, through the Heathrow accord, acceptance that they would compose their own report on the performance of the manager and coach after each series, they have sought to reduce the coach's responsibilities and to decrease the physical training sessions they claim were too strenuous.
Still distrustful of the Board, they have fretted about some of the terms of the agreement and one of their agents, as well as a recent executive member of the Board, have warned that there may be more trouble ahead.
After what has happened here over the past six weeks, some have cynically suggested that a permanent strike would be a blessing.
Such developments should come as no surprise.
As far back as 1992, well before the West Indies's proud record of 15 years of invincibility was ended, Malcolm Marshall, ironically now coach, warned in a newspaper interview: ``Everything seems to be going down the drain. There is no respect, no manners.''
His assertion was clear from the behaviour of several of the most prominent players. Yet, when the coach of the time, the former captain and batsman supreme, Rohan Kanhai, reported to the Board that some had no respect for him and had verbally abused him in public on a tour of New Zealand, it was Kanhai who was fired, not the rude boys.
He was replaced by Andy Roberts, the great fast bowler in teams in which pride and discipline had been the watchwords.
He was appalled by what he inherited. He publicly complained of players with ``attitude problems'', asserted that the fast bowlers paid no need to his advice and revealed that he actually had to cajole the team to take the field after a break in play during a Test match against Australia.
During that series, some players were seen out night-clubbing to the early hours during a Test the West Indies lost by 10 wickets within three days.
Marshall, Kanhai and Roberts did not make their objections because they were prudes. They were all members of great and proud teams and realised that indiscipline off the field would eventually translate into indiscipline on it and that, if not arrested, it would permeate the entire team and, gradually, West Indies cricket as a whole.
The upheavals within the team in England in 1995, when the present captain mounted an unsuccessful revolt against the then captain and left the team in a huff, and in the World Cup the following year, when the captain eventually resigned under pressure and the hapless Roberts was sacked as coach, were further clues that the cancer was spreading.
It obviously needed urgent surgery; the Board did nothing.
``A lot of things have gone under the wash in West Indies cricket in relation to players' behaviour, the players' responses to situations and so on that the West Indies Board has turned a blind eye to,'' commented Clarvis Joseph at the time. He was then president of the Leewards Islands Association. He is now the WICB's vice-president.
Not only did the WICB turn a blind eye; it also turned on itself and has continued to do so.
At the height of another undermining furor last year following the WICB's rejection of the selectors' recommendation of Brian Lara as captain instead of Courtney Walsh, the Trinidad and Tobago Board, one of its affiliate members, adopted a resolution at its annual general meeting charging that there was ``a calculated plot to tarnish the image and international reputation (of Trinidad and Tobago's cricket) using Brian's past indiscretions as the basis for sowing the seeds of destruction.''
It asserted that it would ``stand in defence of its captain, national hero and its world-class performer''.
The WICB rejected the charge and issued a mild rebuke: ``The board members unanimously reaffirmed that all grievances of concern to its members should be resolved within the board.''
Fat chance!
During the recent players' strike, Alloy Lequay, president and chief executive officer of the Trinidad and Tobago Board and only a year earlier a long-serving member of the WICB, refuted president Pat Rousseau's assertion that the decision to strip Lara of the captaincy and Carl Hooper of the vice-captaincy was unanimous.
At the same time, another of the WICB's affiliates, the Barbados Cricket Association, publicly called for the reinstatement of Lara and Hooper even though its own president had been party to the collective WICB decision to dismiss them taken only a few days earlier.
Neither the BCA nor the WICB president saw the eventual humiliating outcome of the impasse as reason to resign, carrying along merrily as if nothing had happened.
Rousseau, bold and brazen and promising dynamic change, came in on a wave of great expectations in 1996, heading a self-styled ``new dispensation''. It has proved a disaster.
It has been embarrassed by one administrative fiasco after another, causing it to lose public respect and confidence.
It recalled Clive Lloyd, the universally respected captain of the invincibles of the 1980s, as manager but gave him terms of reference that have left his talents underutilised and openly frustrated that he has not been allowed to be more involved.
Its efforts to improve its relations with the players, mainly through a US$150,000 grant to the formation of a permanent players' association headquarters, have been shattered by recent events.
The region's governments have paid only lip-service to much-needed financial support for a sport that has become increasingly more professional and more costly to administer.
And, bowing to public pressure, the WICB appointed to positions of leadership, Lara and Hooper, the two players with the longest disciplinary records against the names. It was a peculiar way of dealing with an fundamental problem of indiscipline.
In short, West Indies cricket is in turmoil. It is being continually torn asunder by the same insularity, jealousy, arrogance, greed, personality clashes and power struggles that have undermined so many of our other valued regional institutions.
The inevitable upshot has been at its most visible on the field and on the television screens of the world. South Africa is only its latest manifestation. Australia, Pakistan, where the 3-0 defeat last year was even more emphatic, and the World Cup, with its loss to Kenya, have all witnessed the demise.
The sad truth is that there is no quick or easy solution. Strong and brave leadership is required at all levels, but that is a commodity in short supply in the Caribbean at present.