In many ways, Games officials can thank the ham-fisted Delhi organisers for shifting the spotlight away from their own issues. Crumbling infrastructure, blown construction deadlines and the increasingly delusional and desperate rants of Delhi organising committee chairman Suresh Kalmadi have dominated headlines and spared Commonwealth Games Federation president Mike Fennell and chief executive Mike Hooper from confronting questions regarding their competition's future beyond Glasgow in 2014.

And while media focus has largely centred on those athletes who have shunned Delhi on account of security and health concerns, less attention has been paid to the legion of high-profile competitors who have withdrawn from the Games due to "injuries" that, in some cases, insiders suspect are little more than a convenient excuse to opt out of a competition declining in prestige with each staging.

The lack of star power in Delhi has caused considerable angst among television executives and their advertisers, who are increasingly doubtful they will see a return on their Games investment. Indeed, some have privately conceded that, if nothing else, Delhi's organisational woes and structural collapses might draw a morbidly curious viewership in lieu of the sporting audience lost with the withdrawals of Usain Bolt, Asafa Powell, Stephanie Rice and, as of yesterday, Caster Semenya.

Semenya's pull-out was a bitter blow for Games organisers, who had been buoyed by assurances provided by her coach, Michael Seme, on Tuesday that she would compete despite a back injury. The 800 metres world champion, fresh from a year-long controversy regarding her gender, had been viewed as the potential saviour of a track meeting decimated by athlete withdrawals. But the decision by South African officials not to risk her "nagging" back complaint in Delhi dashed those hopes, and left Games organisers with an line-up looking more B-list by the day.

The competition formerly known as the British Empire Games has proved capable of moving with the times in the past, but never before in such a competitive sporting environment. The rise of sports-dedicated pay and digital networks has provided the likes of athletics and cycling exposure they have never previously enjoyed and, in the process, robbed the Commonwealth Games of its former exclusivity. Will the athletics cognoscenti watch a depleted field compete in Delhi after taking in a season of full-strength Diamond League events? Will cycling enthusiasts be attracted by the prospect of weakened English and Australian teams competing in Delhi less than a week after the eagerly anticipated UCI world road championships from Geelong?

The Commonwealth Games does provide valuable exposure for sports outside the mainstream – when was the last time lawn bowls was aired in prime time? – and the opportunity for teams such as the Isle of Man and Norfolk Island to forge a sporting identity outside the nations that govern them. But while the opportunity to compete at the Games might enthuse those specific sports and dependents/territories, none are likely to attract the kind of audiences Network Ten and Foxtel have banked on – not like, say, a Bolt-Powell showdown over 100m.

Both networks will be hoping beyond hope that the battle between Australia and England in the pool captures the public's attention, and that the prospect of Australian medals – no matter the hue, the sport or the level of competition – quickens the pulses of the patriotic among us. But if that doesn't eventuate, the Commonwealth Games faces a slide into novelty-event territory. And it might well take more than the odd organisational snafu in Glasgow to distract from the broader issues confronting Fennell, Hooper and a once-coveted sporting competition.