Should cricket be played in a time of war? We're not talking about you and your mates taking a bat and ball to the park. Or a school or club game. Or the lower reaches of the representative level.

We mean big cricket. Like the men's T20 World Cup. It's true that nothing anyone connected with the tournament could do would have any impact on events in the Middle East. Besides, good luck telling the semifinalists there are no semifinals to play. Good luck, too, telling the sponsors and broadcasters there is nothing to sponsor or broadcast. They would deploy their lawyers faster than you could say peace in our time.

But does that mean cricket should ignore what's going on in the real world? Of course, the game isn't alone. It's a question for all of sport to consider. That sport tends to turn its back on what's going on beyond its boundaries makes it easy for the unsporting, in every sense, to consign the games people play to the bin of unserious, and therefore unworthy, human pursuits.

So, what is cricket to do about the rapidly spiralling catastrophe that has engulfed everyone's attention? The ICC issued a release on Saturday headlined, in capitals, "ICC activates contingency plans to support stakeholder safety and well-being amid tensions in the Middle East".

The suits were, they said, "closely monitoring the evolving situation" and had "activated comprehensive contingency plans to safeguard the travel, logistics and well-being" of all involved in the tournament.

"The ICC travel and logistics team is actively working with major international carriers to identify and secure alternative routing options, including connections through European, South Asian and South-East Asian hubs," the release said. "The ICC security consultants are liaising with relevant authorities and will provide real-time advisories as the situation develops. A dedicated ICC travel support desk has also been activated. The ICC will continue to issue updates as the situation evolves and remains committed to the smooth and safe conclusion" of the World Cup.

All good, or as good as it could be. But that doesn't tell us what cricket thinks about what's going on. Also, what matters in big cricket happens on the field when the television cameras roll. What happened in that sense at South Africa's Super Eights match against Zimbabwe in Delhi on Sunday? Nothing. And to think Tehran is only 2,400 kilometres, or a flight of four-and-a-half hours, to the west of India's capital.

Black armbands wouldn't have achieved anything, but their presence would at least have signalled the fact that the game had noticed the world had gone mad. As would a moment of silence before the match. Or a dove of peace painted on the outfield, not on Usman Khawaja's boots. Even so, that none of the above took place maybe wasn't a bad thing. Because, in a game like Sunday's, few would have noticed.

The South Africans were in the semifinals before a ball was bowled. The Zimbabweans were on their way home, which has suddenly become more complicated than boarding on aircraft on time. They were to have left on Monday, but have been told to stay put.

Much of global cricket's travel passes through the region that has been plunged into chaos, which has led to the air space there being shut down. For most of the Zimbabweans, that's an inconvenience. For Graeme Cremer, it's brutally close to home. His wife, Merna Cremer, is a first officer with a major United Arab Emirates airline. Were the Zimbabwe players distracted?

"I would hope not," Justin Sammons said. "But I'm sure it's in the back of everyone's minds. You know you're going home, but how are you going home? When are you going home? The conversations are happening in our groups. But I believe the players had full focus on the game when they stepped over the boundary."

The South Africans have at least three, possibly seven, more days in India before they might have to think about wending their way home. But the issue was on their minds.

"It comes up in every conversation," Shukri Conrad said. "So you can't wish it away because it's there. We've just got to try and nail our yorkers and hit the bad ball for six amidst all of that. So while it's part of the conversation we've managed to put it aside. Through our manager [Volvo Masubelele], together with the ICC, we believe all the right decisions will get made."

Spare a thought for the ICC staff working on the World Cup. They and their loved ones live in Dubai. Also spare a thought for the travelling Zimbabwean supporters who, having had their trip sponsored, were relieved to hear they would be on their way, via Ethiopia, on Monday.

Not that you would have had reason to wonder about any of that on Sunday. A crowd of 24,500 - 70% of the ground's capacity - turned up for an utterly dead rubber and cheered their way through almost three-and-a-half hours of going through the motions.

A Zimbabwean win had the potential to change the script for the semis, if it was followed by West Indies thumping India by a big enough margin at Eden Gardens in Sunday's late game to knock South Africa off the top of the Group One standings.

Both of those things happening was unlikely, but if they did then Aiden Markram's team would play their semi against England in Mumbai on Thursday. As it happened, the South Africans won by five wickets with 13 balls to spare, which means they will be at Eden Gardens on Wednesday to take on New Zealand.

Sikandar Raza's 43-ball 73 almost singlehandedly took Zimbabwe to 153/7. If the match meant little to most, it didn't to him - after skying Kwena Maphaka to cover in the 17th he didn't raise his bat as he stalked off clearly remonstrating with himself about the stroke he had played to get out.

South Africa eased to victory - and remain unbeaten after seven games in the tournament - with useful chunks of runs from Ryan Rickelton, Dewald Brevis and David Miller. They did enough to win, but not a lot more. And who could blame them. War or no war, they have a semifinal to play in three days' time. Here's hoping, even praying, sense will prevail by then.