"We can still hold international matches. Terrorists have tried to hit cricket targets in other countries as well."

While much of the focus has been on the game's future in Pakistan, yesterday's attack crystallised safety fears about the entire subcontinent, raising broader fears about the future of international cricket.

The subcontinent is now the financial lifeblood of the game, with its huge populations of passionate cricket followers, and it is feared yesterday's attack might weaken this foundation.

Derek Pringle wrote in The Telegraph that yesterday's attacks would be felt beyond Pakistan, and might even threaten cricket's recent cash-cow, the lucrative Indian Premier League.

"Borders in Asia are porous and cricket all over the sub-continent, a victim of its own success since the launch of the Indian Premier League, is now under threat," he wrote.

"But will that stop players going?

"A time will soon come, however, when ... players involved, in consultation with their families, will have to decide whether the risk-reward ratio of IPL is worthwhile.

"As [Kevin] Pietersen put it before Tuesday morning's terror: 'Half a million quid for three weeks of fun, I'm not turning that down'.

"Yet, how much fun can it be to startle every time a tuk-tuk backfires, or a firework explodes, fearful they may not be the only things going bang when the cricket is on?"

According to the Telegraph, IPL chairman Lalit Modi has said the tournament will go ahead as planned despite yesterday's attacks, and declared India safe.

But Greg Baum on smh.com.au pointed out that "attacks in Mumbai in November showed that it is impossible to pledge certainty".

Civil war rages in Sri Lanka as well.

Imran Khan told Andrew Denton last October that "cricketers would never be under any threat from terrorists [because] terrorists rely on support from the masses ... and cricket is a game which is so loved".

But as Baum wrote, "the rules have changed", and cricket ought to brace for player withdrawals from future tours.

"Another new understanding is that cricketers - all sportspeople - must be allowed to make their own decisions, without prejudice for their future," he wrote.

The Ceylon Daily News, Sri Lanka's national newspaper, predicted cricket would change drastically around the world, but still go ahead.

"Sadly a game that was originally designed for leisure of the British and called the gentlemen's game from now on is going to be attached with attributes that would be far removed from this description," an editorial said.

"Very soon we are bound to see foreign teams being escorted by military tanks and provided with air cover as well."

For many years administrators have urged that sport and politics to be considered separately.

It was under this rationale that cricket tours continued to Zimbabwe, despite strong moral disapproval of the Mugabe regime.

But as Simon Briggs hinted in The Telegraph, cricket's separation from international politics - it's secular fostering of goodwill - might be the very thing making it a target.

"These terrorists have achieved little, in terms of promoting their own bigoted cause, but they have done so much to hurt the international brotherhood of sport.

"If sport brings people together, and helps promote dialogue between nations, they have an interest in destroying it."