Australia hold the key to England's deadlock over Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe's performance in their one-day series against Australia this week will decide their international future. If they are heavily beaten to the point of humil-iation in all three matches they are likely to face compulsory exile from both forms of the game. This would end, at a stroke, the anguished arguments over England's scheduled tour to Zimbabwe in October. Privately, the England and Wales Cricket Board must hope that this is what happens, to avoid further months of turmoil.

The unprecedented move on Friday, when the two-match Test series between Zimbabwe and Australia was called off, appeared initially to work in Zimbabwe's favour. By accepting the obvious weakness of the side without their banned 15 rebel players and agreeing to postponement, they were buying themselves time. But the Zimbabwe Cricket Union acted because they knew they had the lost the support and goodwill of most other cricket nations including, crucially, their neighbours South Africa. Australia's position has also hardened and the chief executive of Cricket Australia, James Sutherland, made it clear yesterday that as far as they are concerned, Zimbabwe's days are numbered.

Everything now probably hinges on the ICC executive board meeting in London on 1 July, when Zimbabwe's status will be formally decided for the first time. Temporary suspension looks certain from Test matches, and their survival as a one-day side is not guaranteed.

The Federation of International Cricket Associations responded by denouncing the deal between Australia and Zim-babwe, because they wanted an ICC vote. Richard Bevan, their joint chief executive, said yesterday: "If it had gone to a vote of the 10 ICC full members it is possible that the ZCU would have been suspended not only from Test matches but one-day internationals. Many people round the world can't see the difference between a suspension because of a weak team from Test matches and being allowed to play one-day internationals."

The ICC claim there are plenty of weaker sides playing one-day cricket and that Zimbabwe need the exposure to improve. Ehsan Mani, the chairman, said: "There is nothing in ICC regulations that sides must field their strongest sides in Test cricket. But we support the deferment of this series because we had to protect the integrity of Test cricket."

But ICC regulations require countries to field their strongest available sides in ICC tournaments, the World Cup and the Champions' Trophy. "There is no doubt Cricket Australia and other full-member countries are concerned about how things have developed in recent weeks," Sutherland said. "I think the question [of their Test status] will be addressed at the ICC executive board meeting in June. It's well known the ICC have commenced a review of the structure of international cricket and there's been some speculation about the various forms that might take."

The loss of South Africa's backing changes everything. Spokesman Gerald de Kock confirmed yesterday that the United Cricket Board of South Africa were against the Zimbabwe series with Australia. And Heath Streak, whose sacking as Zimbabwe's captain led to the player strike and present impasse, told the BBC yesterday that he supported a boycott of all countries touring Zimbabwe.

Australian cricket writer Malcolm Conn, who is covering the tour, told Test Match Special: "It does appear that the Zimbabwe Cricket Union are a very duplicitous organisation. Board members of the ZCU seem to have a policy of putting in the blacks, getting rid of the whites and bugger the rest of them."