There have been many reasons put forward by the English and Australian media as to why England have capitulated down under; poor team spirit, body language, wrong batting order, not bowling to the secret dossier specification. For me there is one simple answer to the problem - await the return of Michael Vaughan.

How is it, that with the same squad last year, Vaughan gave the Aussies a taste of their own medicine? With probably the exception of Kevin Pietersen, the same players - Steve Harmison, Matthew Hoggard, Andrew Strauss and Andrew Flintoff - who formed the backbone of the Ashes-winning side of 2005, can hardly pick up a bat and ball this time round.

Vaughan is not just a fine batsman, he had been on top of the world rankings following a run of great performances. In 2002 he hit 900 runs in seven Tests against Sri Lanka and India. This was followed by a Bradman-like showing in Australia in 2002-3 when he became the first visiting batsman for 32 years to top 600 runs. A typical Test batsman in the mould of a Geoffrey Boycott and Michael Atherton, he was appointed captain of England's one-day side for the 2003 home season, and inherited the Test captaincy two weeks later when Nasser Hussain resigned. The rest, as they say, is history.

After a bad loss at Lord’s to the touring South Africans, Vaughan, leading from the front, pulled the series round to 2-2. After a knockback in Sri Lanka, he led England to a comprehensive rout of West Indies away, the first time this had been achieved for over 30 years.

In 2004, he went even better, winning seven Tests on the bounce, first 3-0 against New Zealand then West Indies 4-0 before an outstanding 2-1 victory in South Africa was followed by the ‘big one’ in 2005 when the Urn returned.

A lot of that success has been put down to the coaching acumen of Duncan Fletcher, but to use a well-worn cliché, the coach is in the dressing room when the players cross the boundary rope and the argument that Fletcher is some kind of coaching guru undermines a simple fact - Vaughan is a born leader. His man-management skills are the best in world cricket, his captaincy is inspired and his ability to lead from the front is second to none.

Vaughan comes from a tradition of Yorkshire captains who have done well for England; Len Hutton, Brian Close (before he was unceremoniously dumped by the anti-Yorkshire and snobbish England board in 1967 for alleged time wasting in a county match at Edgbaston) and Ray Illingworth. These players grew up in the dour northern league circuit, where games between mining towns make the Ashes look like a vicar’s tea party. The Aussies have always been wary of Yorkshiremen because they play their cricket like the Baggy Greens, in a tough and uncompromising manner, a far cry from the MCC gin-and-tonic, striped-blazers brigade.

Vaughan’s problems with injury have been the real problem before this tour even started. Flintoff is the kind of player who needs freedom to show his brilliance. How good would Pavarotti be if he had to organise the transportation of the sets and flog the tickets outside La Scala? It’s too much for Flintoff to captain the side and perform.

Vaughan is back for the one-day series. He may well find this too difficult a situation to have any influence. But come the two-Test series at home to India and West Indies in 2007, if he is fit, we will surely see England back to their best under the stewardship of this inspired leader.

Is Michael Vaughan the man to lead England or does Andrew Flintoff need more time to prove himself as captain? Or do you perhaps feel that Andrew Strauss perhaps make a better long-term captain? Sportingo.com would welcome your comments on this article.