Cost of a game and captain cast adrift

English cricket has been interred far too many times before to start sounding the death knell now. But the remarkable comments yesterday by the England captain, Nasser Hussain, before his side have played a match in the World Cup spoke of a sport at odds with itself. At the very least it is at a crossroads, without much clue of which way to turn. The real worry is that in reality it has nowhere to go, and will be around £9 million and a captain the poorer while doing so.

The final forfeiture of four World Cup points, after the decision not to pursue any further the refusal of the International Cricket Council to countenance restaging the fixture, was almost incidental. In characteristically emotional terms, which did not diminish the sincerity or the power, Hussain effectively told the game's administrators that they could lump it. His ire was directed not especially at his employers, the England and Wales Cricket Board, but at the International Cricket Council, a body he feels have left England in the lurch.

His equally firm words to the chief executive of the ICC nine days ago became the subject of a statement of "regret" from his ECB bosses. Hussain maintained he had nothing to apologise for but said he would be "most definitely" considering his future after the tournament.

It was another extraordinary day at the World Cup, one which once more had little to do with the sport that everybody came to southern Africa to play, officiate or just plain watch. By its end, without having bowled or batted a single ball in anger, England, poor old England were looking desolate and ill-prepared.

A few minutes after Tim Lamb, the chief executive of the ECB, gave his full backing to the captain in Johannesburg, Hussain, in Cape Town, gave full expression to what precisely being at the end of your tether means. Perhaps Lamb did not mean to be too Biblical, but he backed Hussain thrice. But only after, as it happens, having already apologised to Speed twice for Hussain's and England's robust and animated behaviour at the meeting in Cape Town on 7 February.

"It still leaves me in isolation again and my trust of authorities today and for the last few weeks has left me low," said Hussain. "It's only the players and the cricket that I'm watching on television that keeps me going." He was not crying, at least not outwardly.

The England captain made it clear he had absolutely nothing to apologise for. He said he not sworn at any stage. "I just let them know how they let us down, how they should have seen it coming six months ago and seen it snowballing. It shouldn't have come down to this fiasco. For goodness' sake, two players in Zimbabwe have had to make a statement."

So, the longest four months in the history of English cricket had come to this. The fact that it all started with the Ashes being handed once more on a golden platter to Australia seems in the distant past.

Nobody has come out of this bathed in the warm glow of glory. The ICC have been implacable and inflexible, superficially to save the tournament, but in reality to preserve their $550m TV deal – for the good of the game, of course.

The ECB were too dilatory in responding to the fears of the players. The twists and turns of the past weeks have demonstrated that there remains a lack of trust between them. Richard Bevan, the players' representative, was single-minded but lacked a breadth of vision and promised what he patently could not deliver – cancellation of the match without penalty. Nobody has gone more quickly from operating in a bull market to a bear market since the Wall Street Crash.

The players did not get involved until too late. They were happy to leave it to the authorities to decide, and then they were not. Innocents abroad, in every sense. The media have pursued an agenda which has confused the moral dilemma and player security without addressing the issue of what sport is supposed to do in these bizarre circumstances.

Lastly, there is the Government, the only organisation who can walk away from this having stoked the fires of fear and discontent and simply wash their hands of it as though nothing has happened.

In a way, nothing has happened. An evil regime still controls Zimbabwe and what should the British Government care of cricket when there are tanks at Heathrow? It will probably come to be seen as a minor but shabby episode in their tenure. But let nobody ever be fooled that England pulled out of Zimbabwe from a sense of moral outrage. They did so because they feared for their hides.

The day in Johannesburg began early. Speed was to announce the findings, for the second time, of the Events Technical Committee, which had been examining England's appeal to have the match against Zimbabwe played in South Africa. England had not played as scheduled in Harare last Thursday.

Nobody was remotely surprised when Speed declared in that now familiar, measured monotone that the ETC had unanimously decided that the concerns relating to new evidence regarding security were not justified. They did not consider that the Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe, a shadowy organisation from whom England's players received death threats, actually constituted a threat.

Speed then touched on his spat with Hussain. He said that the timing of the meeting was unfortunate (the players had just seen the death-threat letter) and feelings were running high. Lamb had apologised immediately and Morgan soon after. This begged the question that if Hussain felt he had nothing to apologise for, what was Lamb doing? But Speed is pragmatic man with weightier matters to consider and said the issue was finished with.

Three hours later, Lamb confirmed that the ECB would not appeal the decision. But he insisted that he still thought England were right. They had been advised by their lawyers that the decision was technically incorrect. Why not test it with another lawyer, then? Perhaps Lamb knew that it was about time the lawyers were sent packing. The hearing had lasted six hours and involved three QCs.

He talked of having to build bridges with the other cricket boards round the world. Three times he was asked about Hussain and three times he said that the captain had the ECB's full support.

Hussain took to the floor not long afterwards. By the time he finished the only safe conclusion was that cricket had reflected life, in that you knew there were no winners except lawyers. The ECB have now to build bridges, as Lamb said, with countries and with their own players.

They are seething at Government intervention. From the moment Clare Short, the Minister for Overseas Development, said in December that England should not play in Zimbabwe, the issue never disappeared. The ECB responded trenchantly, then the PCA became more involved. The ICC were resolute.

"It's just come down to politics and money, really," said Hussain. "I don't want to dwell on it. What I want to be talking about now is cricket." Some hope.