KNCB general meetings are usually fairly sedate or at least cordial affairs, but at last week's gathering the news that Betty Timmer would be taking on a more hands-on role prompted some rather less-than-diplomatic reactions. Rood en Wit chairman Huib van Walsem went so far as went so far as to compare the KNCB Chair to Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoðan, who is hardly flavour of the month in the Netherlands at the moment.

Said allusions to power-grabbing referendums were prompted by the announcement that the KNCB Chair would be taking charge of a handful of organisational projects at Nieuwegien. Timmer will be as overseeing the development of a new website for the KNCB, as part of a broader new digital communication strategy, as well the KNCB's move to new offices - as the current facilities at Nieuwegein will have to be vacated this year.

In addition to these practical concerns, Timmer will be heading a review into the KNCB's finances, with a view to delivering on the Board's commitment to greater transparency and accountability. Finally, she will be leading a comprehensive governance review for the board. Following extensive comparative research into the structures and models employed by other sports bodies both in the Netherlands and abroad, Timmer hopes to present the ALV with a review of best practices and recommendations for governance reform.

These are four concurrent but separate projects, Timmer explains, but the underlying theme is one of organisationally future-proofing the KNCB. With the (by no means certain) prospect of a dramatic expansion in the organisational challenges facing the board on the horizon, there is broad agreement that reform is sorely needed. Nonetheless there was evident disagreement as to whether it is appropriate for the Chair of the KNCB to be taking direct charge of the project, or to receive remuneration for her work.

Timmer is keen to stress that there is no question of her being added to the KNCB payroll, nor of the KNCB Chairmanship becoming a salaried position, though for the duration of the projects she will receive a fixed allowance to cover expenses. The exact figure has not been made public but is understood to be relatively modest, and whilst the duration of the projects has not been strictly defined, neither are they indefinite.

That said, it has been argued that any form of monetary compensation for Board members runs contrary to the 2005 good governance recommendations set out by the NOC*NSF, and to distinction between the role of paid staff and volunteer boardmembers. It should be noted however that these guidelines themselves are under review, and several Dutch sports boards, including the KNVB and KNSB, have in recent years moved to models which accommodate paid Board Members.

n There remains, nonetheless, a question of whether Timmer's direct involvement blurs the distinction between the roles of the KNCB Chair and CEO Alex De La Mar, and risks raising questions about the board's confidence in the Chief Executive - something De La Mar could well do without, given the unfortunate optics of the manner of his appointment.

Yet in actuality Timmer has always been a more activist Chair than her predecessors, a prospect which was broadly welcomed at her appointment. Since that time she and CEO Alex De La Mar have built a close working partnership, Timmer explains, but stresses that they share a clear understanding of their distinct respective roles.

Given the administrative challenges facing facing the board, there are few that would dispute the task Timmer has taken on needs doing. The alternative is to press on unreflecting with a governance structure not substantially changed in decades or, in the absence of any other obviously suitable gerede kandidaat to head these projects, to hire in potentially expensive external consultancy to oversee the work.

In a perfect world, in would not be necessary for the volunteer KNCB Chair to take on as much as Timmer has, but Dutch cricket is far from a perfect world. Certainly such an arrangement is not tenable in the long term, and their should be no question of the establishment of a salaried executive chairmanship going forward, yet on a temporary basis there is little to justify the vehemence of the opposition that the announcement prompted.

The objections raised so vociferously at the ALV are not without foundation, yet neither are they entirely convincing. Timmer indeed concedes that the arrangement is unorthodox, to which might be added, less than ideal. Yet in this particular case the perfect may be the enemy of the good.