Pakistan's dilemma(-worma)

The biggest one is how to handle the early advantage, something of a new territory for them in recent times. Osman touches the same point in his preview.

Although not as bizarre, the Pakistan team is ensconced within unfamiliarity: they find themselves going into the second Test with a lead to protect, something they haven't done in a series of note in two years.

But for me, another big challenge would be the team composition, now that they have decided to avoid the risk of playing Shabbir. Naved is the next paceman in line, but Faislabad pitch looks friendlier for spin, which means another specialist spinner can get a look in. The other likelihood is of playing Afridi instead of Raza.

Light brown and dry, it prompted Woolmer to mutter knowingly, "It certainly looks as though there is more opportunity to turn here." Not only the pitch, but the cheek behind the remark somehow deems it appropriate that Pakistan's cheekiest tweaker of situations and matches over the last year - Shahid Afridi - is in line for a Test place. With the experiment with Shoaib Malik likely, and rightly, to be extended (Woolmer was "happy with the openers, I think both did very well"), Afridi could come in at number six, a potentially damaging position. Spare a thought, though, for Hasan Raza. The decision to play him at Multan, ahead of the unfashionably solid Asim Kamal might have been untimely; the decision to drop him now could be even more so, especially for Raza's career.

I completely agree with Osman's comment about injustice of Raza's exclusion(as also his callup in place of Kamal). Add to it the fact that Pak batting itself hasn't been much better than Eng's shaky performance, and bringing Afridi instead of a regular batsman is a gamble. But probably Pak is in a position to risk the uncertainty element that Afridi carries with him.

No such luxury for Eng though. Vaughan is willing to take the risk with his injury to get his team back on track in the series, while they contemplate on which one of Bell and Collingwood is a better proposition.

"It's pretty obvious it'll be Collingwood or Bell who misses out," he confirmed. "The selectors will liaise today but it's a tough one. Belly played well, while Colly's only just got into the team."

Personally, I think Collingwood would find himself out of the playing XI, though very much in the scheme of things. And probably, if things go reasonably well for them(meaning atleast a draw) would get another shot in the final test when Strauss returns home, with Vaughan probably moving up to open.

It is not in England's nature to axe a player before he has had a chance to prove himself - especially a man who has been so loyal to the cause as Collingwood - but needs must on this occasion, as England seek the formula to haul them back to parity.

Jonathan Agnew feels the same in his latest column.

Although Paul Collingwood was above him in the pecking-order at Multan, it would be a mistake for the notoriously stubborn Duncan Fletcher to stick with Collingwood, who scored a total of 13 runs

Although, despite Woolmer's suggestion to the contrary, he thinks Malik won't bowl, and that Shabbir might be replaced by Afridi as a specialist bowler.

Shabbir's action looked very dubious from the sidelines - it is the third time he has been reported - and should Pakistan replace him with Afridi, it would bolster their disturbingly fragile lower order.

This, I feel, is surely one possibility Pak team management would seriously consider, since the pitch looks like helpful one right from the start.