England is a matter of days away from being ranked the best side in Test cricket. The Poms will leapfrog from third to first place in the ICC rankings after the fourth and final Test of an embarrassingly one-sided series against the previous top dogs, India. This will be England's first rooftop view since rankings began in 2003 and arguably the first time since 1971 that it can legitimately claim pre-eminence in the five-day format. 

Such are the foibles of the international cricket calendar, South Africa can shortly usurp England on the points table but that should not divert attention from the ascension of the Three Lions. England's strength in depth and youthfulness guarantees it will be a force to be reckoned with for some time yet. 

England's rise has been as rapid as it has been overdue. As recently as March 2009 it was on the wrong end of a 1-0 defeat in a five match series against a limited West Indies and reeling from the resignations of captain and coach. Two-and-a-half years later much the same personnel has buccaneered its way to the pinnacle of the game by consistently producing the most disciplined, adaptable and matchwinning cricket. 

Conversely, Australia's decline in this same period mirrors England's ascent. While England was imploding in the Caribbean there was still no opposition within touching distance of the baggy greens. Fast forward to 2011 and Australia languishes an abject fifth, with a trajectory indicating the bottom of the barrel has yet to be scraped. 

With the interminable Argus review supposedly up for discussion in the coming days, here are five leaves the Australians could take out of England's bestseller. 

1. Overhaul the coaching set-up

England's renaissance coincides directly with Andy Flower's appointment as Head Coach. His impact on the England dressing room, particularly his relationship with captain, Andrew Strauss, cannot be overstated. With similar manpower at his disposal to his two predecessors, Flower has surpassed both by prioritising discipline and teamwork. Along with bowling coach, David Saker, and batting guru, Graham Gooch, England now has a convoy of regimented bowlers able to execute strategies and insatiable batsman with the confidence to manipulate tempos. 

It is difficult to discern much other than confusion and failure from Tim Nielsen's four-year tenure as Australian coach. In recent years, bowling and fielding strategies have been rare, and weak when sighted. Players are demonstrably unsure of their responsibilities with unempowered batsmen, forlorn bowlers and makeshift fielders. 

Recent sprucing of the support staff, including the addition of Craig McDermott as bowling coach, should have some impact but with a new captain in place, the opportunity is ripe to install a new coach to revitalise the Australian dressing room. 

2. Consolidate the selection process

England's recent success has been achieved in large part to the same personnel that seemed so pedestrian in the months preceding Flower's appointment. However, despite the modest results, England's selectors clearly had a plan. Alastair Cook, Andrew Strauss, Kevin Pietersen, Ian Bell, Matt Prior, Stuart Broad and James Anderson were identified early and backed through good form and bad because they were considered the most talented cricketers in the country. Around them, world-class performers Graeme Swann and Jonathan Trott emerged, as well as a number of talented seam bowling options. With admirably few miscalculations, the English selectors have shown faith with a core group for almost four years and have been rewarded handsomely for their shrewd investment. 

Much has been written in this column and elsewhere about the state of the Australian selection process and if the whispers are to be believed Andrew Hilditch is likely to be the highest-profile victim of the Argus report. Regardless of personnel however, above all else there needs to be some semblance of selection strategy and for this to be communicated clearly to a frustrated public. 

We need to be told where selectors consider Australia to be in its development and what plans are in place to ensure both the strongest side of the day and also a competitive side for years to come. 

Australia's best XI is unclear. As the recent fiasco regarding central contracts illustrated, the best 25 does not even have a six-week shelf life. The likes of Simon Katich, Phil Hughes, Steve Smith, Jason Krejza and Doug Bollinger have all been poorly handled, with seemingly no thought put into the bigger picture. The one notable recent success even comes with a curse. Shane Watson, now one of the foremost openers in world cricket, would arguably benefit his side more from batting in the middle order with an increased bowling workload. 

Australia's strategists are guilty of falling asleep at the wheel in the latter part of the previous decade. The opportunity to introduce promising youngsters into a champion side was overlooked in favour of wringing every last drop of success and publicity from bankable household names. This was followed by a lack of appreciation of any transitional period, resulting in the haphazard arrangement of the current Test squad preparing to face Sri Lanka. 

That Hilditch should go is a given. His replacement should come with a clearly articulated statement of purpose. 

3. Play to your strengths

England uses Duke balls because they swing and seam more than others, suiting English conditions and enhancing the natural attributes of the home line-up. Since the start of the 2009 English summer, the home side has lost just twice and drawn just four times in 19 contests against Australia, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, West Indies and Bangladesh. 

As this column suggested recently, Australia does itself no favours by failing to generate favourable home playing conditions. 

Australia has long prided itself on the variety of pitches produced throughout the country. The regional differences provide the most comprehensive test of cricketing skills during a Test series anywhere in the world. However, no longer does the Australian captain have the variety of attack to turn down any advantage he can get. Glenn McGrath is not around to probe on greentops, Brett Lee is too old to terrify on lifters and Shane Warne is too busy as a socialite to torment on Bunsen Burners. 

Next up is India, a side incapable of playing bouncers. It is remiss of Team Australia not to take this into account when planning for the summer. 

4. Feed the grassroots

England's success has been complimented by a County Championship resurgence. The two-division format is proving its worth, there is investment in infrastructure and academies, youth is prioritised and a sense of urgency has been reintroduced into matches that would previously have held little interest to the casual observer. 

It became obvious last summer that the standard of the domestic game in Australia had fallen to its lowest level in living memory. Captain of NSW, Stuart Clark, has written and spoken candidly of the demise of Shield cricket, informing the Daily Telegraph recently that, "The problem is not Test cricket, it is Cricket Australia treating the Shield as development cricket but no one's learning." 

Compounding the effect on the international side, the domestic game has suffered the same difficult transition out of a cohort of champions. Whereas Australia has failed to replace Warne, Hayden et al, states have been unable to substitute the likes of Martin Love, Andy Bichel and Stuart Law - stalwarts of the domestic scene whose achievements both pressurised the Test incumbents but also guaranteed an elite standard of competition amongst the states to prepare the next generation for the ultimate examination. 

It is one thing to criticise execution of strategies at the elite level and blame selectors for failing to pick adequate squads but if they don't have the talent at their disposal there is only so much they can do. 

5. Prioritise

In recent years England has successfully prioritised Tests over the other formats. It has three distinct squads (playing in three separate colours with three different captains) and the public is left in no doubt as to which is the most important. 

With the volume of international cricket played throughout the world, the primacy of Tests as a format is no longer a given. Cricket Australia has to balance its books and ODIs and T20s are clearly very attractive revenue-raising propositions. However, Tests remain the key performance indicator in the minds of the public. Who, for example, cares about Australia's annihilation of England in the ODIs that followed the Ashes compared to the dejection of that Test series defeat? 

The Herald Sun's Jon Ralph elucidated this elegantly in a recent Tweet. "Remember when we gave a fat rat's clacker about cricket. Actually knew who was in the test team? Overkill."

If people employed to write about sport are disinclined to come to terms with the many-headed beast that Australian cricket has become, what chance the rest of the country losing interest pretty soon as well?