GREAT leadership, you might say, requires values. Mohammad Ali Jinnah or Nelson Mandela for example represent values that we admire. Even leaders like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin had values, although we consider their values to be evil.

And in the current crisis in Lebanon the leadership shown by leaders like George Bush and Tony Blair leaves us in despair because we struggle to identify in them any values that attract us. Bowing to Israel, and the Zionist and Neoconservative lobbies are not values that most people, let alone American and British people find attractive.

Sport may be trivial in comparison with these terrible events but the concept of leadership is no different. The best cricket captains have all had some personal values that made them great leaders.

Clive Lloyd's strength of personality and cool brought together the fractious islands of the West Indies. Steve Waugh's willingness to stand firm under the Southern Cross made Australia a truly great team. Pakistan's own apogee came under the fearlessness of Imran Khan.

Mike Brearley was an exemplar of mind over matter, and even his predecessor Douglas Jardine had a determination and cunning that rallied his charges and defeated Donald Bradman by fair means and foul.

Where Pakistan have gone wrong since Imran is that the main criterion to attain captaincy is hierarchy. If you survive long enough to get to the top of the hierarchy you get the job — it is a mark of institutional decay. Promotion thanks to hierarchy alone is poisonous for any organisation or nation.

Sometimes, of course, you may have little choice but to opt for hierarchy as your selection criterion. Pakistan were in such a crisis at the end of the last World Cup. The Age of Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, and Saeed Anwar was at an end. There was no clear successor and the team needed to be forged anew.

Into the void stepped Inzamam-ul-Haq. Many observers had serious doubts about Inzamam as captain. How could a man who existed in a parallel universe become an effective leader? What were his values?

The PCB maintained that it had no other choice.

And Inzamam proved his doubters wrong — including me. He pulled the team together with extraordinary personal performances and very occasional passion in the field. His magnetic value turned out to be his faith and, paradoxically, his desire to end hierarchy.

Pakistan, then, has much to be grateful to Inzamam for. But the question that the volcanic destruction of this series has thrown up is whether or not Inzamam's Pakistan have reached a plateau, a glass ceiling? Can Inzamam take this team any higher?

At net practice at Shenley, the Pakistan team is relaxed if a little reserved. The series defeat weighs on them but has not destroyed their spirit. There is no rift evident between the players, and discord is something Bob Woolmer would not accommodate.

Shoaib Akhtar steams in to test his fitness, almost reaching full speed and troubling, you guessed it, Pakistan's openers. His charge is a welcome sight. But by the end of the two-hour session he is clearly feeling tired. The match against West Indies ‘A’ will be a stern examination.

Inzamam doesn't practice, he just watches and offers advice when he feels one of his squad requires it. His is a gentle style but it carries the air of authority. He has gone from strength to strength in his position as father figure of this team – his team.

Unfortunately, Inzamam's weaknesses have also been all too obvious.

There is a cancerous lethargy in the field when he leads. Pakistan look rudderless and when they might attack they choose to defend. At times of desperation Inzamam is roused to respond but the neglect that takes us to the precipice of despair is bewildering.

The first day of the Lord’s and Headingley Tests were particularly low points in leadership. At Lord’s, the occasion that any cricketer longs for, Pakistan allowed the game to drift by them. It was the job of the captain to inject some passion, some energy, some sense of history?

At Headingley, Inzamam began a crucial evening session with the untested spin of Taufiq Umar and Salman Butt. Chris Read was returning to Test cricket and it was a no-brainer that he had to be pressurised.

Instead, he was emboldened. The final straw was perhaps Inzamam's reluctance to protect his team's long tail on the final day at Lord's. Where another captain, certainly Waugh or Imran, would have tried to take every delivery Inzamam was happy to let his bowlers fend for themselves until the very last man emerged.

This absent-mindedness contrasted sharply with Younis Khan’s urgent and focused performances in the field and in the run chase.

Pakistan, of course, will be unwilling to dislodge their leader – hierarchy still reigns supreme and now clearly is not the right time. But if this were an Australian selection panel making the decision you can imagine what they might be considering.

Inzamam has been a genuine champion for Pakistan and he can stay one for some time to come. But if Pakistan are to move up to the next level in international cricket the time for a fresh leadership approach is fast approaching.

The PCB could soften the blow to Inzamam by initially appointing Younis as the captain of the one-day team. Although the prestige of a World Cup campaign — a measure of success that is fast approaching — might be hard to wrench away from Inzamam.Whoever leads, without energy and aggression Pakistan are bound to lack the verve to win the title. With energy and aggression they might still lose but at least we will all be left with the impression that Pakistan gave it everything.

Second to winning, it is the passion for the fight that matters. The players may well carry it in their hearts but they also need to wear it on their sleeves. This fighting spirit needs to return urgently as a brand value of Team Pakistan.