A week ago Tim Gruijters was looking forward to playing a role with both bat and ball for the Netherlands in their WT20 campaign. Today his international career lies in tatters. The young all-rounder alleges that he has been forced by his coaches to abdicate his place in the Dutch team in order to make way for the aspiring Australian batsman Tom Cooper.

The ICC have confirmed what we all already knew. The Dutch coaching team have not contravened the rules concerning replacing a player in their squad. Tim Gruijters did have an injury, albeit one which he had been playing with for a number of years. But the ICC misses the point.

The issue at stake here is not whether the Dutch coaching set up has broken the oft abused player replacement rule; to punish the Dutch would be hypocritical given how common is the practice of exaggerating chronic injuries for the benefit of the team.

The issue in this case is that Tim Gruijters has exposed the inherent patriarchy which still exists in cricket. It is lazily believed by most that patriarchy in cricket is a disease which Europe is immune to.

Tim Gruijters' career lies in tatters because he has spoken out against this patriarchy, and the authorities (both the KNCB and the ICC) have hung the young all-rounder out to dry.

We should be outraged if a young player has been forced out of a World Cup. We should be outraged if, according to Gruitjers, the Dutch coaches would bully one of their young stars. And we should then be outraged if the ICC and KNCB isn't.

We should also be outraged that the KNCB and ICC are not, but we are not surprised. The ICC is, in my opinion, a self-serving and spineless organisation which has been the subject of many accusations. The KNCB's predictable glee at escaping punishment (as exhibited by their plastering of the ICC's decision not to punish the Dutch set up) is, I believe, indicative of an organisation which is sadly going the way of some other European boards. Informed observers tell me that it is increasingly becoming a self-serving organisation.

But none of this is a surprise. Many National boards are self-serving vehicles increasingly concerned with maintaining the status quo. This is another outrage, but it is not a surprise.

So where does this leave Tim Gruijters?

There is surely no way back into the national set up for him whilst the current coaching set up is still in place. That is a tragedy for cricket in Holland. In the wake of the recent World Cup Qualifying debacle the Dutch should be looking to build a new team around the likes of the Gruijters brothers.

But this is also a tragedy on a personal level. I have had the pleasure of playing against Tim Gruijters. Back in 2012 I played for France in a T20 against Netherlands A. Tim was a victorious captain that day, and I was struck by his maturity and tactical nous. However what struck me even more was the professionalism with which he approached the game.

Often full Dutch internationals take playing against France quite lightly (whilst still playing hard enough to win), but this was not the case with Tim Gruijters. And I am not the only one to be struck by his work ethic and attitude. He is notorious for his commitment and hard work. This makes his alleged victimisation more awful still.

He appears to have become victim to the all too common attitude of putting the team before individuals. A warping of the concept that an individual should make sacrifices for the team. A coaching staff should make a team an environment which allows players to play to their potential, and give their all for the team.

A team set up must not be a dictatorship. According to Gruitjers' version of events, this has happened with the Dutch team. This is not a unique phenomenon, as almost any player will tell you. But, if true, it is an outrage. And the reaction of those with the power to protect whistle blowers like Tim Gruijters is then an outrage too. An unsurprising outrage.