The 2015 World Cup has come and gone with Australia the very deserving winners. For Pakistan, who got knocked out in the quarter-final stage at the hands of the eventual winners, it gave rise to more problems than one and Pakistan`s cricket administrators have already taken the first steps to come to grips with these problems.

The first of these matters that needed the PCB`s immediate attention was the selection of a new captain as Misbah had announced his retirement from the ODI game after the World Cup.

The PCB came up with the name of Azhar Ali and I would be less than honest if I did not say that this completely took me by surprise. Azhar is a good player but he has been classed, I think rightly, as a Test player and one whose natural game is not suited to the demands of limited-overs cricket, be it ODIs or T20s. One trusts that was the reason why he was not even part of the squad that was selected for the World Cup.

From that to have shot to the post of captain was a hop, step and a jump of considerable proportions and it remains to be seen how it works out.

It is bound to have created some apprehensions in the ranks, for captaincy hopefuls will question how it is that a man deemed not suitable for the squad can now be captain.

One can only wonder if that is the reason behind the exclusion of Umar Akmal and Ahmed Shehzad from the ODI squad for the tour to Bangladesh. But whatever the reason, it has to be termed a rather puzzling decision.

Extra cricketing reasons apart, one can find only one cricketing reason for the elevation of Azhar to the captaincy and that is with Misbah`s departure, the selectors felt that they needed someone to steady the ship after a poor start and hopefully play out the full fifty overs when the team is in danger of being bowled out.

If that is true, it shows a mindset that can only be called negative, although to be quite frank, it cannot be said that the recent performances of the Pakistan batting line-up, including those in the recently concluded World Cup, do not merit such an approach.

Perhaps the entire procedure through which captains are appointed in Pakistan needs to be revisited. The PCB chairman has the right to nominate whomsoever he pleases and this surely is not the way to go about it.

It should primarily be a decision of the selection committee which may then be ratified by the chairman. Under the present system, any input by the selection committee seems to be a matter up to the chairman, who is not bound to seek any such advice.

There has also been an explosion of sorts in the ICC with the resignation of its president Mustafa Kamal of Bangladesh and its ripples may be felt far and wide. It is the first real indication of just what the new world cricketing order with India, Australia and England naming themselves as elite nations implies.

Mustafa Kamal dared to call into question the integrity of the umpires in the India-Bangladesh quarter-final and was punished for that by not being allowed to give the World Cup to the winners at the presentation ceremony.

Never mind the fact that those who punished him had no right under the rules to do so; the informal structures of power speak much more loudly than the formals ones and that, regrettably, has always been the case in cricket.

It is perhaps the only sport in the world which legally allows for a playing field that is not level with the umpire having the right to give a batsman out on a certain piece of evidence and another not out on exactly the same, or even greater evidence.

Of the twenty umpires who were on the panel for the World Cup, only five were from the South Asian subcontinent while as many as 13 were from England, Australa and New Zealand where as the population of South Asia would be at least twenty times that of England, Australia and New Zealand.

This sort of glaring imbalance has to be set right, for justice must not only be done, it must also be seen to be done. The current world cricketing order does not do.

I also think that the ICC, with its changes to the rules governing fielding restrictions and drop-in pitches, has swung the game heavily in favour of batting. The beauty of the game lies in a balance between the two main cricketing skills.

The drop-in pitches seemed to have been made to take spinners completely out of the game and this, again, has hit the South Asian sides, visible from the fact that only one managed to make it to the semis. If this is the way cricket is to go, shedding tears about the demise of spinners in the game seems rather less than genuine, when all the conditions are being created to ensure just that.

I am also surprised to hear that Pakistan`s nominee for the post of ICC president will not be the head of the PCB, but Mr Najam Sethi.

The Pakistan Cricket Board is alone in following this strange practice of `nominating` someone other than the head of the cricket board for the top ICC post. It did this with Ehsan Mani and has done it again for reasons that are not clear. In no other boards has there ever been any reason to `nominate` anyone, for when a country`s turn comes up, the head of that country`s cricket organisation automatically takes up the post. Why cannot Pakistan follow the same tradition?

In any case, if a person has to be nominated, I think it would be appropriate to nominate a former cricketer rather than an administrator. It would be a befitting honour for someone who has served the game in the best possible way, by going out there and performing in the middle, rather than an administrator who, by and large, is unknown in the cricketing world.

Now, with the coming of the new system of elite nations, the ICC president is no more than a ceremonial figure head and as such this role would be best suited to a former player of genuine international standing.

The ICC should give this matter serious thought. The more cricket is taken away from its grassroots and put into the hands of people who, for the most part, owe their position to political patronage, the less well will this game be served.

The writer is a former Pakistan captain