A sullen Inzamam-ul-Huq sits through the inquiry which later held him responsible for Pakistan's World Cup debacle © AFP

It was thoroughly decent of the inquiry to get the sordid business of the World Cup out of the way before Pakistan toss off against Sri Lanka. Now Shoaib Malik’s team can think about the job of resurrecting Pakistan as a competitive cricket team—which is exactly what they were a year ago.

The rot set in during the tour of England when Inzy’s troublesome ways were being openly discussed by people close to the team. The cricket board, of course, should have managed Inzamam to maximise the chances of Pakistan winning the World Cup, instead Dr Ashraf spent his time maximising his own chances of remaining chairman of the board.

Hence, while Inzy must take a fair share of the blame for the disaster, the strength of the inquiry’s damnation is somewhat out of proportion with Inzy’s sin. An employee only persists in destructive behaviour if an employer allows him to. The World Cup failure was as much down to Dr Ashraf as it was dictated by Mr ul Haq.

Which leaves us wondering where Inzy goes next? How much of this can a man take? This winter has to be his last in Pakistan colours. Whether he plays one Test, one series, or one full domestic season of international cricket, Inzamam ul-Haq must name his date to go—and stick to it. A time limit will help the succession and let’s hope it helps restore his dignity.

Careers are marked with successes and failures, rights and wrongs, blame and absolution, heroes become villains, and villains become scapegoats. The end should be a moment to celebrate, but to celebrate properly we have to know when the end will come.

	Lasith Malinga's four wickets in four balls is one of the highlights of the World Cup © Getty Images

When Malcolm Speed admits something isn't right you can bet your life that it's horribly wrong. After spending most of the last few weeks defending this turgid tournament, he now accepts that the format is too long. It is possible to create a format that incorporates associate members, gives the better teams less chance of being hijacked, and is done and dusted in thirty days. It took me five minutes to think of such a format, and I'm sure anybody reading this blog could come up with something similar.

I've seen every World Cup so far and I have no doubt that this is the most tedious ever--and not because Pakistan were knocked out. The semi-finalists were decided too quickly, as were the semi-finals themselves. The business end of the tournament hasn't done the business. A collaboration between the ICC and the local organising committee has managed to alienate fans and kill the atmosphere. The people of the Caribbean deserved better.

At least the best two teams have reached the final, which could be a classic, but even then will struggle to sweeten the bitter taste this tournament has created. Australia have been truly formidable, extending their remarkable record in World Cup cricket. If they win on Sunday, who could begrudge them their brilliant success? Do McGrath, Gilchrist, Hayden, and Ponting deserve any less?

But for each over-whelming favourite there is an over-whelmingly supported underdog. Hundreds of millions of cricket fans will be rooting for Mahela's Magicians simply because it would be great to see somebody other than Australia win. More than that the magic moments of this World Cup--Malinga's four in four and the final-ball defeat of England--have belonged to Sri Lanka. There is a variety in their bowling--slingers, swingers, and doosras--that gives them the best chance of humbling Australia. That's before we get into the poetic justice of Murali triumphing over the country that has brought him most humilaition.

Australia have been awesome but the moments have belonged to Sri Lanka. Either team would be a deserving winner. Take your pick, power or magic? I choose magic.

Anybody who was awestruck by the West Indian teams of the 1970s and 1980s and captivated by the allure of calypso cricket will be bitterly disappointed. I remember the first time Sky showed a live Test series from the Caribbean, England were routed but the atmosphere that shone out of my television screen brightened many cold, dark evenings.

When the World Cup was awarded to the West Indies everybody expected to be touched by that same warmth, either in person or via HD, LCD, or cathode ray. Instead, the World Cup has served up a soulless experience, worsened by the death of Bob Woolmer, the elimination of India, Pakistan, and possibly West Indies, and a ticketing policy that has removed the atmosphere from the tournament. A conspiracy theorist might blame the ICC for all three of these calamities--for various reasons from match-fixing to bad planning--but that presumably would be unfair?

As a fan of West Indian cricket I want this World Cup to succeed. It still can. Belatedly, more imaginative ticketing policies are being implemented. This may be too little too late but let's hope not. There are still plenty of big matches to look forward to, and yesterday's thriller between England and Sri Lanka might be the turning point as teams become more desperate to secure points. Finally, West Indies can still qualify for the semi-finals, and I hope they do. Cricket needs to be strong in all four corners of the globe for it to grow as a sport, and anybody who loves cricket must want the West Indian team and their supporters to be a major force again.

And what's all this wishful thinking got to do with Pak Spin? Well, apart from a thrilling tournament being good for cricket and West Indian cricket in particular, I want those international losers from Pakistan (and India) to regret and curse every moment of their absence from this World Cup. I want them to view the levels of professionalism on display and understand what they need to do. I want them to be desperately hungry for success next time--so hungry that it hurts, just like it hurts their fans to see them out of the tournament.

For the sake of South Asia, bring on the pain, bring on the calypso.

	Wasim Akram is the greatest bowler of his generation © Getty Images

Glenn McGrath, the human metronome, took Wasim Akram's record of most wickets in World Cup cricket. Australia have dominated the World Cup since Pakistan beat them at Headingley in 1999 thanks largely to McGrath's brilliance and the record is well deserved.

It says something about Pakistan's World Cup that their only bowler to set a world record in this tournament was Mohammad Yousuf who took a wicket with his only ball.

About the only positive I will take away from this tournament from a Pakistani perspective is the way that his contemporaries have acclaimed Wasim Akram as the greatest bowler of his generation. When that accolade comes from Brian Lara, the greatest batsman of the same generation, then that is high praise indeed.

Similarly, a host of Australians have stood up at the moment of McGrath's achievement to agree with Lara. That's saying something too since these are Australians who played in the last two decades, when their team ruled world cricket.

(As an aside, it has been interesting to hear the insight of Australian cricketers who have turned to commentary--I have always been impressed by Michael Slater but Damien Fleming has been a revelation. It just shows that success at cricket requires sharp brains, a topic I will return to in relation to Pakistan cricket.)

Wasim Akram was a colossus in world cricket, and the World Cup story was closely entwined with his own in the 1990s. It began with an inspirational triumph in 1992, when his late order hitting and double wicket burst swung the final for Pakistan. Everybody already knew that Wasim could make the ball talk but he went and did in a World Cup final.

Post Imran, the future looked to belong to Wasim but it never properly worked out the way it should have. In 1996, he missed the quarter-final defeat to India with a rib injury. And the 1999 campaign was a triumph but for the disaster of the final and a stumble against Bangladesh. On both occasions, as now, unsubstantiated accusations of match-fixing complicated the mourning.

That 1999 side, to my mind, was probably the best Pakistan has ever fielded at a World Cup and they played like world beaters. Waqar Younis was 12th man for heaven's sake. Indeed, the victory over Australia at Headingley was perhaps the finest by a Pakistan team in a World Cup outside the final two performances in 1992.

The resources available to Pakistan cricket in the 1990s allowed an administrative complacency to set in that has encouraged its foundations to crumble away. It created a complacency among the players too that manifested itself in sometimes hopeless performances.

Despite all his records, many people wonder if Wasim and his team could have achieved even more? Perhaps he and they could have. But let's remember he achieved all he did despite a career made more difficult by diabetes and the crazy politics of Pakistan cricket. Let's also remember that, like McGrath and like Lara, he achieved the utmost respect of his contemporaries. No higher praise is possible.

	© Getty Images

Some might say that the World Cup is better off without the bloated stars of India and Pakistan. As a punishment for arrogance, decadence, and incompetence it is probably well deserved. But as arrogant, decadent, and incompetent as these two cricketing giants might be, their absence from the second part of this tournament does detract from it. Yes, there is a certain romance about Ireland's progress and something exhilarating about Bangladesh's youthful dash for the Super Eights. Yes, it is tremendous to see minnows walk with giants and giants fall to minnows. But the tournament has been stripped of perhaps twelve heavyweight encounters.

The players, of course, have only themselves to blame (along with their cricket boards and their coaching staff) although being wrong footed in one match looks a harsh methodology to condemn these two great cricketing nations to four years of waiting.

While the World Cup tries to recover from the murder of Bob Woolmer more than the departure of two former Asian powerhouses, the lesson for India and Pakistan is a simple one: "You have four years to prepare a team of professional sportsmen (and that also means athletes), selected by committees that implement a ruthless meritocracy, and supported by cricket boards that run the business and the administration rather than meddle with team affairs."

Of course, India and Pakistan will do none of these things. They will flatter to deceive and then recreate this shambles in the next World Cup. This tournament has reminded us that life is more valuable than sport but it has also clarified that arrogance, decadence, and incompetence are not a formula for success. Let's hope that the introspection this World Cup has induced will help India and Pakistan understand what professionalism is all about. If they have any lingering doubts they might spend the next few weeks watching how Australia, South Africa, and Sri Lanka expect equally high standards from the aged and the inexperienced.

This World Cup has ambushed Asia's giants but it has also shown them how far they have been left behind in international one-day cricket. It will take some serious structural and attitudinal reform to be properly competitive again.

	The institute would be an investment in the talent in Pakistan, a talent that Bob so admired but felt frustrated that he could not develop quickly enough © Getty Images

Bob Woolmer murdered? The world is shocked and ashamed that a such a genial and warm-hearted soul could die by somebody's hand. I keep saying it can't get any worse for Pakistan cricket and it keeps getting worse by gigantic leaps. It is likely too that the identity of the murderer will make the matter even more unpalatable. Throughout all this I am amazed by how dignified Bob's family have been at a time of utmost distress. They are people of genuine character and fortitude.

The President of Pakistan has already awarded Bob a distinguished civil honour. My suggestion would be for the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to set up a sports science and cricket institute at a major university in Pakistan--and by this I don't mean another National Cricket Academy. The institute could be named after Bob or have a professorial chair named after him.

I think this would serve three purposes. First, it would create something that would chime with Bob's passion for the science of cricket and further the frontiers of knowledge. Secondly, it would be an investment in the talent in Pakistan, a talent that Bob so admired but felt frustrated that he could not develop quickly enough. Thirdly, it would mean the PCB had an onus to support the long-term development of Pakistan cricket, something again that Bob felt wasn't given enough attention while he was alive.

There is much to discuss about the future of Pakistan cricket but there will be time enough for that later. We require a pause for reflection on the life of Bob Woolmer and the tragedy that surrounds him and his family.

	Asian cricket heroes have a habit of leaving the stage humiliated. They can't want it that way and it can only mean that their cricket boards do not offer them the protection they deserve at the end of their careers © AFP

Despite a few flashes of his old self in the last year he now looks a misfit in one-day internationals. His decision to play on in Test matches is one he will have plenty of time to reconsider since Pakistan's next Test is months away.

Where Inzy got it half wrong was in his timing. But he was already clearly devastated by the loss to Ireland and the death of Bob Woolmer must have made it harder to think clearly.

Even so, at times like this, I worry about the advice that our players receive. I'm sure Inzamam received heartfelt views from his family and friends, but one of the team management, the media manager perhaps, should have advised him to delay his announcement considering the awful events that were unfolding in Jamaica? Perhaps they did but Inzy wanted to let it all out?

Asian cricket heroes have a habit of leaving the stage humiliated. They can't want it that way and it can only mean that their cricket boards do not offer them the protection they deserve at the end of their careers. This must change and they must retire with dignity.

For now, it is hard imagine how this World Cup campaign, beginning from the end of last year's England tour, could get any worse.

Bob Woolmer's death is an utter shock. He was a thoroughly decent man who wanted the best for Pakistan cricket and its talented players. I had utmost respect for Bob's dedication to Pakistan cricket and never doubted his desire for the team to succeed. Ultimately he failed. Much of that was to do with the failures of the Pakistan system and the domineering approach of Inzamam. Some of the responsibility did rest with Bob, and he knew it.

At the end of Pakistan's tour to England he promised me that he would do more to assert his ideas upon the team's strategy. But within days Pakistan cricket was in turmoil. A new captain, a new board chairman, and a new feel to Pakistan cricket. I'm not sure Bob ever recovered his poise after that but his commitment to the cause meant that he stuck with it. I am shocked and distraught at Bob's loss to world cricket, and feel great sadness for his family who he always spoke of fondly. He may not have succeeded in the way that he wished with Pakistan but he was brave enough to take on an almost impossible job.

Some readers have rebuked me for criticising Bob in my open letter. To my mind, that's an insult to Bob's intelligence. He was a media man. He understood how the media works. He expected criticism and responded well to it. He was robust enough to challenge his critics, and would take them on directly. He expected me to call it as I see it and would give his honest views in return. We had a great professional relationship because we both wanted the same thing: Pakistan to succeed. If I thought it was time for Bob to go he would have expected me to tell him, although of course he may have disagreed. That is a measure of the man, a thinker, a debater, and an innovator.

My last exchange with Bob occurred before Pakistan's match against Ireland. He was cautiously optimistic. I asked him whether Pakistan could win the cup. He said: "Inshallah, to quote the team."

I then asked him if he would soon be compliant with the Urdu-only policy and he replied: "What sort of rubbish is that [policy] it was mainly instituted to allow those poor in English to express themselves now it has taken on a very different turn. I will have to brush up on my Urdu quickly - Gurrum Chai do chini!"

In many ways the skill of Bob Woolmer was wasted on Pakistan cricket and many millions of Pakistan cricket fans around the world are grateful to him for taking up the challenge.

	Under pressure: Inzamam-ul-Haq and Bob Woolmer © AFP

Dear Inzy, Bob, and the Doc,

There have been many bad days in the history of Pakistan cricket but 17th March was probably the worst. You have taken a group of players with ability and turned them into the most spineless, lethargic bunch in the world.

For two consecutive matches, every Pakistan batsman has died a coward's death. They have confirmed their status of flat-track bullies and low-intensity stars. Congratulations, of course, to Ireland who played out of their skins but they really should never have beaten Pakistan, green wicket or flat top.

The way this reality has been hammered home to Pakistan fans leaves us in shock and fills me with disbelief. I, like many other romantic fools, believed that the World Cup would bring the best out of you, that your players would fight to the death, and would prosper on West Indian tracks. Even now, I say that the only team this bunch of players should have found to be unbeatable in this tournament is Australia. The rest are evenly matched in ability but it seems your team is handicapped by its habit of shrinking to the occasion. The team's supporters have been horribly betrayed. You will understand the anger and it will come at you like a howling wind.

The Pakistan cricket team was once known for its fighting prowess but you have stripped these players of any spirit or steel. Your bowlers have retained some will, they performed admirably in both encounters. In truth, though, they too lacked the killer instinct, that extra 10%, that would have dismissed the West Indies more cheaply and knocked out Ireland. You have paid a heavy price for your inability to make best use of Waqar Younis, and people will ask what Mushtaq Ahmed achieved other than giving himself and you a bloody nose?

Your fielders wander the outfield like elephants, young men grown old and old men grown arthritic. They are a blot on international cricket, a sport that now requires fitness, energy, and speed, yet your players are like the noble unbending amateurs of some bygone era.

Only Pakistan cricket could do this because only Pakistan cricket could have a system that fails from A to Z. Only Pakistan cricket could have a system whose failures are protected by the patronage of the president of the country. Whatever the merits of the president's work elsewhere, he must take responsibility for being shamed by the shamrock. Because, ultimately, he appointed his pal, the good doctor, to rescue Pakistan's world cup chances. Instead of rescue, Doc, you have orchestrated a catalogue of disasters, embarrassments, and ill-conceived schemes and intrigues. For shame, Doc, move on. Look after human development in Pakistan, though on second thoughts if you are as unsuccessful in that as you have been in cricket administration perhaps you had better leave human development to somebody else.

Your combination has failed too, Inzy and Bob. Your choices, your strategies, your inspiration have brought us to this. Nobody should doubt that you both had the best of intentions but the best of intentions mean nothing when your team surrenders in a hurry. And it is not as if these failings are new. Unsettled openers, batsmen unable to negotiate swing or seam as they gift wickets like sweetmeats on Eid, and a general lethargy about the team that only disappears in moments of crisis. You have given the impression of men asleep on your watch, but Pakistan's cricket fans are some of the keenest observers of the game. And the majority don't like what they have seen this last six months. What they have seen most obviously is an absence of leadership, a confusion in strategy created by disunity of purpose, and persistent failure on the cricket field.

With all due respect, I believe it is time for both of you to seek pastures new. The extent of this loss means that Pakistan cricket must build afresh, free of the shackles of the past. Many will say that you should have gone much earlier but I believe that up to last year's tour of England you both helped Pakistan regain much respectability in international cricket. But everything possible has gone wrong since then and Pakistan cricket now finds itself in a similar mess to the aftermath of the last World Cup. Overall, no progress then, a bad situation to be in.

But I hope you are not made the only scapegoats because the shit needs to pass upwards and cover you Doc and your man at the helm, Salim Altaf.

What to do? Well, Pakistan cricket will survive. There remains a passion for this sport like no other in the country's cities and villages. But Pakistan cricket requires a root and branch reform, a top-to-toe shake up. The PCB requires to be run by people appointed on the basis of merit not friendship or relationship. And the first job that meritocracy should do is sack its selection committee and replace it with some real champions of Pakistan cricket.

	After the lethargy of Inzamam, is the passion of Shahid Afridi the antidote we all need? © AFP

Our new captain needs to be somebody with age on his side and fire in his belly. A leader who will lead by example and fill his charges with a passion to succeed. We know there is no perfect choice but what Pakistan cricket needs to rediscover most urgently is its attitude. These spineless capitulations sit uncomfortably with us emotive Pakistanis. There are only three candidates to my mind: Younis Khan, Shoaib Malik, and, I thought I'd never say this, Shahid Afridi. Something inside me says that after the lethargy of Inzamam, the passion of Afridi might be just the antidote we all need.

Finally, at this moment I can't help but think of the great players that made Pakistan a force in world cricket, the battles they fought to create a team for a whole nation to be proud of. I can't reconcile those images in my mind with the joke of a cricket team we have desperately supported over the last six months, batsmen unable to bat, bowlers unable to stay fit, with some fanciful notion that all would be well come the big day.

Inzy, Bob, and the Doc, you came, you saw, and you floundered. The best thing you can do for Pakistan cricket is leave it to rediscover the qualities that once made it great. You have sentenced us all to four years of painful memories. Failure, they say, is an orphan but this one has at least three fathers, and the fathers of this failure need to adopt some other child.

In the end, though, it just shows how important a skill great leadership is--and none of you possess it.

	Mum's the word when it comes to English © AFP

Now here's a strange thing. Pakistan's cricketers are banned from speaking in English at press conferences. The reason we are told is that their wonderful use of Urdu will promote tourism in Pakistan. I'm not sure how that works, particularly since their words will be revealed to the world by the warbling English of PJ Mir, Pakistan's media manager?

Consider too that Urdu doesn't readily lend itself to describing a cricket match. A beautiful verse of poetry, yes, but try saying great cover drive without using any English words and you begin to sound like a dimwit--and Pakistan's players are no linguistic cousins of Mirza Ghalib.

In fact, the notion that speaking in Urdu will lure foreigners to Pakistan is fantastically crazy. By extending that logic the player chosen for the press conference grilling should have a shave, put on his coolest shades, an Hawaiian shirt, and a pair of shorts and flip-flops. Because let's get one thing clear: the sight of bearded men speaking in an Eastern tongue will not be a tempter for most people who don't happen to be Pakistanis.

Indeed, the idea that speaking Urdu might be enticing invokes a Western image of Orientalism that has long been discredited as racist.

The simple answer, of course, is that Pakistan's players should be allowed to speak in whatever language they wish. Inzamam, for example, enjoys jousting in English at press conferences, and he fully understands the questions put to him. One of the pleasures for journalists at a Pakistani press conference is Inzamam's considered pause after a question is put to him, a pause that is often followed by dead-pan humour. His vice-captain, Younis Khan, is as bubbly with his English as he is on the field.

The Pakistan Cricket Board, then, has created a solution to a problem it didn't really have and brought further controversy upon its head. And it is perhaps its head who this edict should apply to? Dr Nasim Ashraf has caused more problems with his utterances in English than his players ever have, and, yes, he probably does do a disservice to Pakistani tourism. He possibly also argues that he spends more time touring with the national team than back home in Pakistan so that he can do his bit for the Pakistan Tourist Board? I reckon Dr Ashraf should worry less about tourism and more about human development in Pakistan, his other job, which, if he makes a success, will do more for tourism than any cricket press conference.

Ultimately, though, bakwas is bakwas in Urdu or English--and there's enough of it emanating from the Pakistani camp to say: "Stop these trivial pursuits and start focusing on what really matters--like winning the World Cup."

While some of you may be tempted to suggest I eat my words, I suggest you hold your fire. There is a long way to go in this World Cup. West Indies put in an admirable team performance that exposed the holes in Pakistan's strategy, and they should go a long way in this tournament. But I'll say again--at the risk of getting lynched--there is only team that Pakistan don't have the skill to beat and that's Australia. Whether or not they can achieve what they are capable of is a different matter.

Much depends on how quickly Pakistan can learn from this defeat. In short, the bowling was good and the batting was bad. Here are some issues for Pakistan's brains trust, if I can call it that, to ponder:

1 Many of us expected a new opening strategy. That didn't happen, in which case why was there chopping and changing in the warm ups? Why persist with a strategy that keeps failing again and again?

2 Whoever opens, surely Mohammad Yousuf and Inzamam have to push up to number three and four? The batsmen managed to excuse their dismal performances in South Africa by blaming the bouncy tracks (when the tracks weren't as troublesome as they might have been). What's the excuse now?

3 Surprisingly Pakistan abandoned their long-term strategy of batting deep with all-rounders. Today, Pakistan's tail stretched from number 8 to 11. Why this sudden change?

4 Rana's performances have become an embarrassment. He is a pressure valve for the opposition, releasing it at every opportunity. He needs to be given a break, probably a long one. His batting is too feeble to command the number 8 spot. Many readers of this blog can't understand how he keeps getting selected considering his expensive performance since his return from injury (OK, he had one good home series against West Indies). It's a fair question. Why oh why? Please spare us. If an all-rounder was required in that spot it should have been Azhar and if a bowler had been required it should have been Sami. Rana's selection was inexplicable. Somebody needs to explain it though.

5 Can Pakistan afford to discard their fastest bowler, Mohammad Sami?

6 Part of the problem is that Pakistan have turned up in the Caribbean with too many bowlers and not enough batsmen. Which reserve can Pakistan call on if one of their batsmen hits a bad patch? Nobody.

7 Afridi must play, but can Pakistan afford to play both Afridi and Kaneria? It depends on the conditions probably.

While it might feel like time to abandon hope, it isn't. This World Cup has only just begun and it's better to lose now and peak later. It's certainly better to cry later.

	Pakistan have nobody to fear in the tournament © Getty Images

Pakistan's preparation for the World Cup has been a rollercoaster of hope and despair, a journey that has driven supporters to the edge of madness. Many of you already consider me to be a raving lunatic and to those people I offer further evidence. Pakistan have nobody to fear in this tournament and might just have the mix of experience and hunger to lift the trophy.

Experience resides in the right place, the mighty middle order. Michael Slater questioned their ability to win matches but he is sadly mistaken. This is a double mistake if the pitches continue to play anything like they did in the warm ups. What this trio have lacked is the support of the openers but Caribbean conditions will offer Pakistan a genuine opportunity to establish an opening partnership of substance. Indeed, both Imran Nazir and Mohammad Hafeez will be hungry for success.

Hunger will also drive the bowling attack. Umar Gul, Mohammad Sami, and Danish Kaneria - my first choice attack depending on pitch conditions - have enough experience but also something to prove. There should be nothing stale about Pakistan's bowling attack, with Azhar Mahmood, Shahid Afridi, and Mohammad Hafeez a worthy support cast.

Since Rana Naved-ul Hasan, Iftikhar Rao, and Yasir Arafat have something to offer - death bowling, consistency, or all-round ability - Pakistan have plenty of bowling options. Even in the absence of Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif, it is a bowling attack that can potentially compete with any in the tournament. It also comes with the added bonus of being under-rated by most cricket pundits, an estimate based more on ignorance than sound judgment.

Australia remain the only team that pose a special challenge. Ricky Ponting, Adam Gilchrist, and Andrew Symonds were three good reasons why Australia's form has slumped in recent weeks. Indeed, Symonds offers wonderful balance to the Australian team. If those three fire Australia will be tough to beat, and that's before the possibility of Shaun Tait's speed and reverse swing creating a sensation in this World Cup. Yet, although England and New Zealand wouldn't be my favourites to win, they have done the other leading teams a favour by reminding Australia of their mortality.

Pakistan have arrived with a deceptively strong squad of players, some of whom must make a name for themselves in this tournament just as Inzamam did fifteen years ago. At this moment in time the road to victory looks far less difficult than it might have been. Much hinges, once again, on Inzamam's leadership and all Pakistan supporters will be rooting for him--in Urdu, English, and many different languages--to rise to the occasion. In a few hours time we will get the first indication of whether or not Pakistan have the intent to match their considerable potential. I have a crazy notion that the lunacy of the last six months must have been building to a glorious finale.

	'Inzamam too often tends to let the game drift when he should be trying to seize the initiative' © Getty Images

When Inzamam-ul-Haq led out Pakistan in yesterday's opening ceremony he took me by surprise, smiling and waving enthusiastically at the crowd. Inzamam's mood is a vital influence on his team. When it is dark and brooding it can crush the enthusiasm of his charges. Only today, Imran Khan has accused Inzamam of leading from the rear.

Inzamam has a low-key style of leadership, undemonstrative to the point of invisibility. When the game is going Pakistan's way this doesn't matter too much, indeed a captain's real skill is revealed in adversity. Unfortunately, Inzamam too often tends to let the game drift when he should be trying to seize the initiative. Now, nobody wants Inzamam to become the team cheerleader - he's got Younis Khan for that - but he must stamp his desire and will on proceedings. If the captain is lethargic in his approach so will the rest of his team.

Inzamam, of course, is capable of passion and visible engagement but those responses too often arise in extremis. In one-day cricket there isn't much opportunity to pull your team back from the brink. Inzamam needs to captain for his life from the first ball of the match to the last, not in flashes of desperation.

He must also seek advice from his senior players and his coach. Leadership may be lonely but any leader is only as good as the people in his team. There is nothing to be gained from internalising the team's burden and responding in splendid isolation. The best captains are those who are willing to listen to trusted lieutenants and then make a decision that is in their opinion best for the team. Imran Khan may have made a name for himself for leading from the front but he constantly had Javed Miandad in his ear. Ricky Ponting is only half the captain he can be when he doesn't have Shane Warne's wisdom to fall back on.

Who will be Inzamam's wise lieutentant? Younis Khan is a great enthusiast. Mohammad Yousuf is reserved but thoughtful. Shahid Afridi is fire and brimstone. Shoaib Malik is a wise head on slender shoulders. None of them is a Javed or a Warne but in combination these senior players must support their captain and their captain must listen.

This mission is not Inzamam's alone. If it becomes that it will become a road to nowhere. This is a mission that must be owned by all of Pakistan's players and coaching staff. But in sport the only kind of leadership that works is leadership from the front, that unites players behind a clear vision. Inzamam is a great leader and a great thinker when he is at the crease. He has to quickly become a good enough leader the rest of the time as well.

If the warm up matches have proved anything it is that this is an open tournament and despite their crazy preparation Pakistan have a genuine chance of victory. Inzamam has done much to unite these players with his silent authority. But he must now shed any fear of failure, get his head in the game, and lead like a champion. Win or lose, nobody will criticise him for that.

	© AFP

Despite Bob Woolmer's stonewalling of my piercing questions earlier this week - I know you all thought the interview was tremendous really - we now have a good idea of what Pakistan's new strategy will be.

Younis Khan will try and enforce some stability at the top of the innings while young Mr Nazir attempts to unleash hell. Mohammad Yousuf and Inzamam will move up one position to number three and four, the premier batting slots, and Shoaib Malik will be left to marshall the lower order or then again Mohammad Hafeez might.

It is too early to call this a winning strategy. But when your old system isn't working, a reasonable approach is to try something completely different. On that basis Pakistan's new batting order is worth persevering with. It also gives Pakistan's best batsmen, Yousuf, Inzamam, and Younis, the maximum opportunity to influence the match.

Furthermore, Hafeez and Malik, who can both be leaden footed when the ball moves around early in an innings, might be more comfortable lower down the order.

Kamran Akmal will take one of the next two batting slots, but the complication arises when considering which combination of bowling all-rounders and bowlers to go for. One of those slots would go to Afridi, in my view. Potentially, though, Pakistan can bat right down to 9, even number 11 if the mood takes them.

The first indication is that the wickets might indeed be to Pakistan's liking but the warm up against South Africa will give us a better idea if this is a strategy with legs. It has had a mixed start but one that offers hope.

	Bob Woolmer: 'All teams must be respected' © Getty Images

On the eve of Pakistan's first warm-up match, I put a few questions to Bob. Here are his answers:

Question 1: Do you possess enough match-winning bowlers?

Bob's answer: Depending on the surfaces we have a well balanced attack. If they bowl as a unit we will be competitive. This world cup may well revolve around the batting performances - bowling in one day cricket now is more dependent on the disciplines they follow.

Q2: The view from the boundary, and the living room, is that Inzy's captaincy style is too laid back. Is that true? Is he capable of great leadership?

Bob: There are two answers to this question. His captaincy is fine for one-day cricket. I expect him to lead from the front.

Q3: Where will he bat?

Bob: That is for us to know and for the pundits and the opposition to find out.

Q4: The opening batsmen remain under pressure. Will you be trying any new strategies?

Bob: Opening batsmen in all teams are under pressure. Ours more so because of the tendency for all Pakistani pundits to believe they can do better.

Q5: Who is your finisher?

Bob: The batsmen in at the time. All players are aware that they have to take responsibility for finishing an innings. Malik at 6 is most likely to be there at the end if all goes well.

Q6: Can your legspinners win you the World Cup?

Bob: I personally wouldn't want to put them under any pressure to do so. A lot will depend on the type of surfaces we are playing on. Cricket remains a team game where we hope all players will contribute to winning.

Q7: How do you expect the pitches to play? Will they suit Pakistan?

Bob: This is the unknown factor, of the two practice pitches we have had they have both turned appreciably.

Q8: Who do you see as Pakistan's main threats?

Bob: All teams must be respected and each game must be taken one at a time. All sides are good enough to beat each other on the day.

Q9: Which players will you be asking to stand up and lead by example?

Bob: I expect all players to lead by example throughout the tournament.

	Pakistan must now make best use of their available bowling resources © AFP

One day, of course, the truth will get out, and if their withdrawal is because of remnants of nandrolone in their bodies then it will bring a further disgrace upon Pakistan cricket.

On the face of it, Pakistan's chances of winning the World Cup are seriously damaged. Certainly with Shoaib and Asif available, Pakistan would have been genuine contenders. You might even ask if there are any remaining bowlers that are worth mentioning. Well, call me an eternal optimist but there's still plenty of potential in this squad.

When Waqar was ruled out of the 1992 World Cup, I felt the blow in the pit of my stomach, this double loss doesn't feel the same to me.

Shoaib has appeared so inconsistently that we've all grown used to him being unavailable. A real shame considering his ability. Asif might be considered by some people to be a bigger loss but let's remember that Asif isn't greatly experienced in one-day international cricket, and he looked far from comfortable once South Africa started getting after him in the recent one-day series.

Most importantly, it's no use hankering for what you don't have and Pakistan must make the best of the resources available to them. Where there's heart there's always hope.

When it comes to bowlers, Pakistan's one-day strategy is such that their all-rounders usually bowl at least twenty of the fifty overs, sometimes more. So that's work for Shahid Afridi, Mohammad Hafeez, and Shoaib Malik.

The other three bowlers have to be wicket-takers. Umar Gul grew in speed and in stature as an international bowler in 2006. If he can recover his form quickly, he is capable of carrying the pace attack. The next wicket-taker is Kaneria, who should be played whenever conditions suit him.

That leaves one or two places, depending on conditions and form, for Mohammad Sami, Rana Naved-ul Hasan, and Rao Iftikhar to contest. Sami, for my money, looked a better bowler in South Africa and his one-day record is good. Rana had a good home series against West Indies and recent cricinfo stats showed that he is the most effective death bowler, which is perhaps when he should be used. Iftikhar is probably the most consistent of the three at the moment. All three of them bowl at a fair clip, which is an advantage.

That leaves Azhar Mahmood and Yasir Arafat to slot in whenever opportunity allows.

The World Cup isn't only an arena for heroes but it is one that creates them. The question that Pakistan's remaining bowlers must ask themselves is whether or not they are willing to seize the opportunity to make an international reputation in this World Cup?

Gul, Kaneria, Sami, and Arafat would be my bowlers to watch.

	Can Azhar Mahmood cover for the loss of Abdul Razzaq? © AFP

Afridi and Razzaq have the added element of being super-explosive hitters, and my view is that Razzaq can be a vital ingredient in the last ten overs, when Pakistan often aim to score over 100 runs. Pakistan will miss him. Could he have been sent to the Caribbean and withdrawn in a couple of weeks if he had not improved?

In any case, Razzaq's loss is Azhar's gain. The Surrey all-rounder has been mistreated by the PCB, ever since, in fact, he gave me a commendably frank interview for Cricinfo. Azhar's bowling is a stronger suit than Razzaq's. He can also be an explosive hitter, but Razzaq is extra-special in that regard.

But the question is whether or not Malik and Hafeez can step up and provide the Pakistan batting with some solidity? In addition, Hafeez's one-day bowling form is impressive although Inzamam has tended to underuse him.

More than the rest, though, Afridi can be a talisman. His bowling form is good enough for him to be selected on that alone--and a wise coach and a smart captain will use that to take the pressure off him. But when his batting comes off, he wins matches. Now that may not happen enough for many people's liking but Afridi has hit rich veins of form in the past. Can he do it in a World Cup? If he hits straight and true, like he did memorably in Chennai, he could emerge as a true champion rather than a breaker of hearts. On this one, you all know, I'm with Boom Boom. Let's hope he doesn't boom out.

	Oh ... for another Saeed Anwar © Getty Images

It must be quite frustrating for Imran Khan, for a decade almost everything he said was implemented. He was the first and last word in Pakistan cricket, with a few thousand thrown in between by Javed Miandad. The rule of Khan culminated in Pakistan winning the World Cup, enough said. Now Imran struggles to get his way--and let's be clear that the PCB's strategy of pep talks by great players is more of an intrusion than a benefit at this late stage.

But one area that Imran has complained so much about that perhaps everyone has stopped hearing him is the dilemma of openers. Inzamam believes he has the best pair available. Bob Woolmer, I suspect, is less sure but will do his best with the materials given him. Imran is more definite: the choice should have been Salman Butt and Yasir Hameed.

Imran may well have a point but it was hard to prove since the PCB and Inzamam have failed to try that combination in the run up to the World Cup. Particularly baffling was the decision not to give Yasir Hameed a run in South Africa.

Nonetheless, it's true enough that none of the openers have succeeded. This opening problem is not new for Pakistan and Imran knows it well. Middle-order batsmen have been made into openers going right back to the 1975 and 1979 World Cups when Majid Khan opened the innings but did well against the mighty West Indian bowling attack. By 1983, Mohsin and Mudassar had formed a stable opening partnership but one that failed to deliver its promise. In all three World Cups, Pakistan had been knocked out by West Indies.

The mainstay in the next two tournaments was Ramiz Raja, who despite a decent World Cup record had the habit of firing only sporadically. Indeed his pairing with Aamer Sohail in 1992 was often a hair-raising enterprise. Sohail had matured to some degree by the time he partnered Saeed Anwar in 1996--although that isn't saying much. But on Asian wickets, the combination of Aamer and Saeed was dynamite and perhaps the best that Pakistan has ever enjoyed at a World Cup.

When the 1999 tournament came around, Saeed had established himself as a World class opener, the best Pakistan has had since Hanif Mohammad. This meant that his unknown partner Wajahatullah Wasti had an easier ride than most Pakistani openers have ever had. I'll never forget the sight of Imran Khan teaching Wasti how to play a forward defensive on the team balcony after he'd got out in one of Pakistan's group matches. It was as if he was teaching a six-year old.

Come 2003, Pakistan were a confused outfit. Saeed was bowing out but underutilised prior to the tournament, and Shahid Afrid was in one minute and out the next. Pakistan's chop-and-change strategy was in full swing. Saeed Anwar, Shahid Afridi, Taufeeq Umar, and Saleem Elahi were all given a go.

Four years later, who could have predicted that Pakistan would still be confused about their first choice openers but they clearly are. Yet, Imran Nazir has a rare talent if he can be persuaded to harness it sensibly. Mohammad Hafeez is a hitter who can graft--or is he a grafter who can hit? In Kamran Akmal and Shahid Afridi Pakistan have further explosive capabilities. Desperation, though, can provide a creative solution, and the suggestion that Younis Khan might open is in the grand tradition of Pakistani middle-order batsmen turned openers and it is one that might succeed.

Most importantly, Pakistan need to decide their strategy and stick to it. The openers will have five games, including warm ups, to find a certain chemistry. I reckon Hafeez and Nazir is the pairing to go with in this squad. A World Cup is a stage to make a name for yourself and grow as a cricketer, and both of them should be hungry. They will be helped by West Indian wickets being unlike South African, Australian, or English. Might Pakistan turn a weakness into a strength? If they can, Pakistan's challenge will become a genuine one.

	'Defending against Kaneria in Test cricket has been possible but attacking him in the one-day game might be a different matter altogether' © Getty Images

One of the reasons Pakistan won in 1992 and Australia won in 1999 was that a legspinner was a threat in the middle of the innings. It wasn't a case of the opposition milking the bowling, instead they had to bat for their lives. Some commentators--including many of you on this blog--have called for Kaneria to be selected. Given the uncertainty with Pakistan's other wicket-taking bowlers, I'd say that the clamour for Kaneria is a just one. This might spell bad news for Abdur Rehman or Azhar Mahmood, but I'd make one essential change to my squad and Kaneria would make the cut. Let's hope he's there. Defending against Kaneria in Test cricket has been possible but attacking him in the one-day game might be a different matter altogether.

Kaneria has been a conundrum. He should have been tried earlier. Some of you will say that this is a mark of my insanity or evidence of my desperation but Kaneria could be the matchwinner that Pakistan's bowlers can rally around. Will Bari, Bob, and Inzy do it?

	Should Kamran Akmal stay for the World Cup? © AFP

If Pakistan's selectors were seeking some kind of signal as to what to do they didn't get it. Instead, what is clear is that with a month to go before the World Cup, Pakistan have problems. And the main one is this: while Pakistan teams are known for their unpredictability, the performance of this group of players fluctuates so wildly that it is hard to imagine how they could put together a consistent enough run to lift the trophy. Wind back to 1992 or 1999 and Pakistan teams might have come a cropper here and there leading up to the World Cup but they were able to put together sequences of victories that made them genuine challengers.

One reason for this current pattern though is the dramatic variation in personnel through injury. Any success that Woolmer and Inzy have had was forged through consistency of selection but this South African tour has been a joke with players shuttling between South Africa and Pakistan as if it were a commuter trip.

What to do? Well some players pick themselves. The middle order of Inzy, Yousuf, and Younis is set in stone. Kamran Akmal has to be persevered with, it's too late to change now--and the strategy of him opening could be a spectacular triumph in the Caribbean. Mohammad Asif, Shoaib Akhtar and Umar Gul are the first line of pace attack. Of the all rounders Shoaib Malik, Abdul Razzaq, and Shahid Afridi are the late-order attackers that Pakistan's strategy hinges on.

That leaves five places to discuss amid the consideration that West Indian pitches will smell like the sweet grass of home to Pakistan's players. On that basis, I'd back Imran Nazir and Mohammad Hafeez as two of three possible openers (along with Kamran Akmal). The pace attack will need back up, which means Sami, Rana, and Azhar fighting for two places. I'd go for Sami's extra pace and Azhar's all round ability. That leaves one place for a spinner and despite today's outing, Abdur Rehman showed enough in the home series against West Indies to win the spot.

There might be a case for others like Salman Butt, Yasir Hameed, Yasir Arafat, and Danish Kaneria but if they are real contenders they should have been out here getting ready.

If this squad of players is fit and Pakistan can gel, they have a chance. Nobody, though, expected this level of unpredictability so close to the World Cup. But when it comes to Pakistan cricket, the next tournament can be a very different story. It needs to be.

(And yes, squads and XIs are allowed on this thread).

	The test of leadership is whether or not you will seek counsel from people you may not choose as your friends but who have something to contribute to the mission.Inzamam has sadly failed this test © Getty Images

The lesson that Ashraf has learned is that people care more about cricketers than they do about officials. And secondly, people care more about results than they do about individual cricketers. Pakistan's abysmal failure in the Champions Trophy punctured Ashraf's machismo but the worry is that the pendulum has swung too far back in Inzamam's favour for the good of Pakistan cricket.

Inzamam's hold over the team is a double-edged sword. If he uses his influence in a positive way Pakistan may well be capable of achieving great success this year. However, if his mood crushes the people around him, which it began to do during last summer's tour of England, Pakistan cannot succeed.

Imran Khan once had a similar hold over his team but he was wise enough to know that he had to harness the talents of people that he may not have liked or necessarily agreed with. The outcome was more important than pride--although he had plenty of that too. The test of leadership is whether or not you will include or seek counsel from people you may not choose as your friends but who have something to contribute to the mission. This is a test that Inzamam has not passed, and for the sake of Pakistan cricket he needs to. There is a huge risk in allowing one man to monopolise strategy, particularly when he has able support around him. Indeed, Inzamam is no Imran. He has never struck me as having the clarity of vision or ideas to do it alone.

Inzamam has succeeded in many ways in his career, and he is a contender for the title of Pakistan's greatest ever batsman. He has single-handedly won international matches and almost single-handedly won a World Cup. He has brought great stability to Pakistan cricket under his leadership. But his biggest failing is that he has become over-bearing and fallen too easily into a negative mindset. This is evident in the kinds of pitches that Pakistan have prepared under his leadership, the suggestions to Mohammad Sami to drop his speed, his on-field decisions, and now the selection of the current touring party. Pakistan had no need for so many batsmen, particularly those in the middle order, for this short tour of South Africa. That extra place should have gone to a bowler.

Yet that is Inzamam's way. It is the mindset that I believe inhibits Pakistan cricket. Yes, stability is essential and I have argued for it myself, but leadership is about allowing the talents of your charges to flourish and managing--not excluding--difficult personalities. It is also about seeking wise counsel and including your management team in deciding which is the best way forward. Inzamam, great player that he is, needs to harness the knowledge of his fellows and free the spirit of his players--and he needs to begin now.

A confession: thanks to my iPod I have recently rediscovered qawali. Some years ago I became obsessed with Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, the greatest qawal of all, and I was in delighted disbelief when Jeff Buckley, another of my favourite singers, declared an admiration for Nusrat and then collaborated with him. The bond between cricket and qawali was forged when I discovered that a strong cup of tea, a fried egg, and a rousing rendition of Haq Ali Ali were ideal preparation for a big innings (yes--even I've had a few). But the clincher came when it emerged that Nusrat's qawalis were an integral part of Pakistan's 1992 World Cup victory. So, in this season of goodwill whatever race, religion, or nationality you may be, I commend to you qawali, an art form that transcends all these boundaries. Some of my favourite qawalis are in Farsi, a language I barely understand. I commend it too to Team Pakistan, who require inner peace and outward fearlessness to win next year's event. Nusrat might be dead but his voice can rekindle the magic and the spirit of '92.

	'Pakistan will need Inzamam to be exuding postive energy between now and the end of the World Cup' © AFP

Despite initial speculation that Inzamam-ul-Haq would not lead Pakistan in next year's World Cup, the cricket board has sensibly confirmed his appointment. I confess that I am one of the many who have often despaired at Inzamam's moribund captaincy - and it is something that might still cost Pakistan dear - but he is the obvious choice. Younis Khan, who retains the potential to succeed him, showed with his antics before Pakistan left for the Champions Trophy and his tactically suspect performance during the tournament that he was unready.

Inzamam, though, is on a mission, and that mission is to win the next World Cup and surpass his former captain, Imran Khan.

You might think that surpassing the Great Khan is something not worth contemplating but he is. And he believes he has the team to do it. Moreover, Inzamam has launched a campaign to build a hospital in his hometown, Multan. I'm sure that rings a few bells. Inzamam may not have Imran's leadership skills but he does have a dominant presence in the team, a persona whose moods dictate the mindset of his charges. Pakistan will need Inzamam to be exuding postive energy between now and the end of the World Cup. A return to the dark mood that engulfed the second half of Pakistan's tour of England will be a disaster.

The second piece of good news to emerge from Pakistan is that Bob Woolmer's position is secure until after the World Cup. Woolmer believes Pakistan had a good series against West Indies and he is upbeat about his team's chances in next year's tournament. He has always held this positive outlook even in the depths of the Hair incident when he considered resigning his post.

These moves are a vote for stability, a strategy supported by this blog. But the PCB has still got a long way to go to answer its critics. Particularly when it believes that the creation of a fielding award will improve the team's fielding, and then awards the prize to Inzamam. And perturbingly appoints a friend of the chairman of the cricket board and the president of Pakistan as its media manager for the World Cup. I don't think the PCB has ever understood how the media works - this is an organisation that pays for journalists to go on tours but who barely write a word - and I don't think it ever will. As long as friendship is more important than merit, Pakistan will never realise its talent in cricket or anything else.

In the true Pakistani way, one step forward and one step back. But the step forward is the one that matters for Pakistan's World Cup chances and it is the players who will create the memories to treasure and not the legion of hangers-on desperate to see their names in lights.

	Bob Woolmer's local knowledge should give Pakistan a good chance of being competitive in South Africa © Getty Images

The machinations of this year have left Pakistan with a far stronger pool of bowlers to choose from and some clearer possibilities around the opening slot, their weakest area. These factors combined with Bob Woolmer's local knowledge should give Pakistan a good chance of being competitive in South Africa and perhaps even overturning their poor record in that country.

But before that can happen it is imperative that the PCB confirms that both Inzamam and Woolmer will lead these two upcoming campaigns. Pakistan have a real opportunity to win the biggest one-day prize and any dithering now will be detrimental to their challenge.

Despite WADA's posturing, both Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif will be available next year and that leaves Pakistan with an unimagined selection problem. Umar Gul, Rana Naved-ul-Hasan, and Mohammad Sami--yes the bowler who couldn't bowl two balls on the same spot--have all made indisputable cases for selection. As has Abdur Rehman, who has been nothing short of sensational in this series. At Karachi, on a wicket that favoured batsmen, he bowled an intelligent line, even keeping Brian Lara in check. That fills six places.

Among the batsmen, Yasir Hameed has shown enough to earn a place along with Mohammad Hafeez. Follow those with the inevitable selections of Pakistan's middle-order trio of Inzamam, Younis Khan, and Mohammad Yousuf and you have five more places with people's names on them.

Among the allrounders, Shoaib Malik, Abdul Razzaq, and Kamran Akmal--providing he continues to rebuild his confidence in South Africa--are virtual certainties, which builds the squad to 14.

That only leaves one place, and you can see why Woolmer is claiming that the squad selection is becoming clearer, although this final spot might prove controversial. Imran Farhat, Faisal Iqbal, and Danish Kaneria, to name but a few, will be saying their prayers. Who will win a trip to the Caribbean? It could be any of those three but it might be a wild card, and Pakistan has no wilder card than Shahid Afridi. He'd win my vote--as you all know--and I suspect he might even win the vote of the selectors.

Much can happen, of course, between this December speculation and the reality of next March but barring major upheavals I wouldn't bet on Pakistan's World Cup squad being much different to this. It is a squad of experience but also enough youth to hunger for success. The bowling riches are the team's strength and the batting should not be found wanting on the Asian wickets of the West Indies. The rest is all mind games. Over to you Bob and Inzi.

I don't usually post comments that include team XIs or squads but since that is what this article is about then feel free to speculate.

	Icing on the cake: A Pakistani win at Karachi but with a piece of Lara magic © Getty Images

The question that nobody will ever be able to answer is just how brilliant Lara might have been had he had a half decent team to support him? My guess is that he would have been unstoppable. And for much of his career he threatened to be, particularly in the days when individual batting records were falling to him with ease. But the hopping maestro from Trinidad has not just been a man for records. He has saved his country on numerous occasions against the best teams.

From the beginning Lara has had a particular liking for Pakistan. In the 1992 World Cup he destroyed Imran's team with an effortless dominance, a harbinger of the coiled beauty that he would unleash on all nations.

As with all heroes, he has divided opinion in his homeland but elsewhere his genius has been unequivocally acclaimed. The love for Lara has been evident in the Champions Trophy and now this West Indian tour of Pakistan. And Lara has responded like a true great, handling the fortunes of his team with immense wisdom, dexterity, and sportsmanship.

Some readers of this blog, including Mr Euceph Ahmed who generally enjoys disagreeing with every word I write, have requested a piece on Lara. We should all give Lara the send off he deserves, and I have no doubt that the Karachi crowd will not be found wanting.

This may be a World Cup year and a winning finale would be nice for Pakistan. But it would be equally heart-warming to see the last piece of Lara magic on Pakistani soil. For this match only, my head says Pakistan but my heart says Lara.

The Multan one-day international was a baffling experience. Here are ten reasons for bafflement:

1 Shahid Afridi opening the batting instead of coming in down the order.
2 Mohammad Hafeez not opening the batting with Imran Farhat.
3 Shoaib Malik's form.
4 Rao Iftikhar's selection.
5 Umar Gul's absence and Abdur Rehman's absence.
6 Some Pakistan fans being unable to appreciate anything Faisal Iqbal ever does.
7 Yasir Hameed's eternity away from the international scene.
8 Kamran Akmal's inability to find some form.
9 Abdul Razzaq's decision not to bowl Rana more.
10 Abdul Razzaq's captaincy in general.

	Rana rediscovering his edge © AFP

Whenever Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif do return to international cricket, Pakistan might have a pleasant problem on their hands. In their absence, Umar Gul has grown his hair, upped his speed, and seized the opportunity to become the team's spearhead. But the most encouraging news of the series thus far is that two bowlers whose positions might have been questioned have given Pakistan the edge.

Rana Naved-ul-Hasan, a man who once rose to the occasion like Gul, has recovered his fire. In England and India, Rana had looked anything but the clever strike bowler that he is. Since his omission from the Test series he has worked hard on his fitness and on his technique--he says with Waqar Younis--to recapture the form that had made him an essential selection.

The second revelation has been Abdur Rehman, a man who has been hanging around the Pakistan squad like an uninvited guest. He may not be the "youngster" that Inzamam described him as, prompting a fit of laughter from Ramiz Raja, but perhaps that's a good thing. On the evidence of these first two matches, Rehman is a highly skilled left-arm spinner. His action is a touch unusual with his head almost turned away from the batsman as he delivers but he has hit a near perfect line in this series. His general energy and tidiness in the field suggest that Danish Kaneria might never make it into Pakistan's World Cup squad.

Pakistan's traditional strength has been its bowling. In a World Cup year, the return of Rana and the revelation of Rehman are important landmarks. With bench strength comprising Shahid Nazir, Mohammad Sami, Shabbir Ahmed, Yasir Arafat, Danish Kaneria, and Shahid Afridi--that's before we dare to discuss the comeback of Pakistan's most notorious bowlers --Inzamam's team is shaping up nicely in an important area. Australia might be in for a contest after all.

	The Tests are done, but now begins the World Cup campaign © Getty Images

Pakistan begin their 2007 World Cup campaign in earnest tomorrow. This is clearly the squad of players that the Pakistan management will gamble their futures and their burning effigies on. Throw in Shoaib and Asif when match fit, and Shahid Afridi when he is back in the groove (I've said my piece on 'Boom Boom' already) and you have the extent of Pakistan's talents.

This is bad news for anybody expecting a new star to emerge like Inzamam did just before the 1992 World Cup but it is good news for people arguing for a period of stability. And there is much going for that particular argument. Think back to the middle of the one-day series in England. Pakistan were being lauded from hill and dale as the perfect combination to lift the next World Cup. A few minor inconveniences later and Pakistan are still very much the same team. Could they do it after all this? It would make an incredible story.

But Pakistan's one-day form has hit the buffers since that English praise undid the players. There are mitigating circumstances. England in September wasn't the best place to build a batsman's confidence, and more surprisingly neither was India in October. South Africa may be misleading too, hence this series offers the closest approximation to likely conditions in the Caribbean, minus the cool beers and the hot tubs.

This series matters. Several players, bowlers in particular, will be fighting for a World Cup berth.

But despite the one-day failures there are some positives. First, Umar Gul has grown in stature as a front-line bowler over the past few months. He began the England series as one of a handful of hopeful third-seamers (Shoaib and Asif being numbers one and two). He begins this one day series as the clear number three with potential to rise up the pecking order, a fast-medium bowler who can carry an attack. Second, Mohammad Hafeez looks increasingly to have solved one half of Pakistan's opening problem (Imran Farhat continues to fill me with dread though).

These are important additions to the "perfect combination." Despite the hell that Pakistan cricket and its supporters have lived through over the past few months, the next World Cup offers a fabulous opportunity. Inzamam wants to emulate Imran. The campaign begins here, and it needs to begin with the swagger of title contenders.