Test cricket can breathe again - for the time being, at least. By agreeing to leave Virender Sehwag out of the squad for the first Test, the Board of Control for Cricket in India has taken the only sensible course of action available to it. The alternative was unthinkable. England would have jumped on the first flight home, India would have pulled out of their tour of England in 2002, and the game would have been split in two. It's just a pity the decision wasn't reached earlier.

But Jagmohan Dalmiya is a businessman, and he knows better than anyone that there's no such thing as a free lunch. In return for dropping Sehwag, Dalmiya has persuaded ICC to review both the status of the South Africa-India clash at Centurion, which would be a farce, and the process by which Denness reached his decisions, which is common sense.

ICC must continue to be clear-minded. This means that Centurion - which seems to attract controversy like Hansie Cronje used to attract bookmakers - must remain a non-Test. Shaun Pollock said his side played it as such, and to impose retrospective Test status now would be like telling students that their mock exams actually counted for real. Why do India want their innings defeat to become part of Test history anyway, especially now that the Sehwag affair has been cleared up? At the risk of provoking another barrage of "racist" accusations, this condition sounds suspiciously like Dalmiya showing the world he won't be pushed around.

But ICC is quite right to respond to Dalmiya's call for a change in the way match referees reach their decisions, even if Dalmiya's chest-thumping defiance hardly deserves the courtesy. If ICC had had one in place when Denness handed out his fines, India would have been less inclined to take the law into their own hands. To its credit ICC has come up with a suggestion quickly, and its chief executive Malcolm Speed said today that it will put in place a referees' commission to "look at a number of issues". One of them is the right to appeal, so we have found this particular cloud's silver lining.

The thorny issue of Sachin Tendulkar - and the rage of his fans - remains. Denness has already explained that Tendulkar received his suspended ban not for tampering with the ball but for failing to ask the umpires' permission to clean it. But in this atmosphere of conciliation - and in the interests of clarity, an ingredient missing from the cauldron of the last few days - it might be wise to issue another statement, making it quite clear that Tendulkar isn't a cheat, and apologising for any confusion over the initial decision. Whatever happens, ICC must not make Denness a scapegoat merely to satisfy Dalmiya, who is likely to seize on the slightest show of weakness.

There remains one other issue to clear up: the role of South Africa. While India had genuine grievances with Denness, South Africa simply had financial concerns. They agreed to go along with India's call to ditch Denness because they wanted to cash in on gate receipts, and because their government was worried about damaging trade links with India. Cricket was secondary, and ICC shouldn't forget this.

Now we can get on with the cricket - until, that is, the next political volcano erupts.

Lawrence Booth is assistant editor of Wisden.com.

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd