Inzamam will appear at an International Cricket Council (ICC) hearing in London on Friday on two counts relating to the ball-tampering and forfeiture of the match at the Brit Oval. If found guilty of the more serious level three charge of bringing the game into disrepute he could be banned for between two and four Tests or four to eight limited-overs internationals.

Fletcher watched part of Saturday’s play through binoculars and the Pakistan camp are aware of rumours that he asked Procter to be vigilant against foul play. If they suspect that Fletcher influenced Darrell Hair, the umpire, it will fuel their suspicions of a conspiracy. James Avery, an England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) spokesman, said: “We can confirm that Duncan visited the match referee on Sunday, but he made no specific complaints about the ball.”

Pakistan have vowed to contest the charges against Inzaman and blamed Hair for the problems.

Woolmer, who told The Times that he considered resigning over the damage caused to the sport’s image, fears that a ban for their captain could seriously jeopardise the one-day series due to start on August 30.

“I would think the one-day tournament will be in jeopardy if Inzamam is found guilty and banned for eight games. The players are behind their captain and if there is a ban there will only be more problems.”

Shahriyar Khan, the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) twice declined to confirm that the one-day series will go ahead if the captain is banned. Asked whether he could guarantee that if Inzamam is banned the team would still play, Khan, a former diplomat, said: “I don’t want to answer hypothetical questions. We will cross that bridge when we come to it.”

The cost of withdrawing from the five 50-overs matches and the Twenty20 game next Monday could be about £10 million in lost receipts. As the ECB would try to reclaim that money from the PCB, the financial consequences are prohibitive. There is a practical solution, because Inzamam would be allowed to play during an appeal against any ban. The cases will be heard by Ranjan Madugalle, the ICC chief match referee, rather than Procter, who will be called to give evidence. The appointment of Madugalle reflects the scale of events.

As captain, Inzamam is responsible for the behaviour of his team, but the fact that no other player has been charged with ball-tampering by Hair and Billy Doctrove suggests that they are unable to highlight a specific moment of wrongdoing. This raises questions about the evidence they can offer in three days’ time.

None of the 26 Sky Sports cameras picked up any foul play, and Woolmer said: “I asked every single member of the team under oath whether they had scratched the ball during that innings. To a man they said no.”

Explore Cricket

• Counties