MICHAEL VAUGHAN was absolutely right when he said last week that “absolutely” any of the top six nations could win this marathon of a World Cup. It depends how much value one puts on the word “absolutely”, and one could probably say that he was absolutely right, if only as an affirmation of England’s chances of springing a surprise first World Cup win.

It is galling that England have never won the trophy and the right to be crowned world champions despite having been in three finals and having experienced the sadness of ultimate defeat in three different parts of the world. Until February 2, the day and night of the victory over Australia that began the revival which finished with two more wins over the Aussies and the Commonwealth Bank Trophy, nobody would have given England a cat in hell’s chance of getting close to a semi-final in the Caribbean. But now . . . who knows?

England’s new-found confidence will give them more of a chance to play to their potential. But crucially for the tournament, when it eventually gets going properly in the second phase, the decline of the Australians in the past month has opened up the contest, because the previously hot favourites are back in the pack, and the pack knows that they can be beaten.

Despite that, it seems the bookmakers are still not prepared to downgrade Australia from their position as favourites, and they have a point. We all saw how they reacted when the Ashes were taken away from them in 2005, and they have had a week or two to regroup since the Chappell-Hadlee disaster.

They are still good enough to bounce back, even though they still have problems with the fitness of key players — Brett Lee definitely out, Matthew Hayden on the road to recovery after his toe injury, and Andrew Symonds’s return to playing fitness the new definition of optimism.

It has been of some consolation to England, I suppose, to see that when Australia lose key players — Ricky Ponting and Adam Gilchrist were absent from that trouncing in New Zealand — they too become vulnerable, whatever their claims about the quality of their second string.

In Australia’s favour still is the experience they have of planning a successful World Cup campaign. Their form in 2003 peaked beautifully at the right time, and in the 1999 World Cup they came on strongly as the tournament progressed, though even they would have to admit good fortune played a mighty important role in their two vital encounters with South Africa.

If the Aussies can manage the same progression again, they will be hard to beat at the business end of the competition — the big “but” being the fitness of the those key men. The extraordinary length of the competition helps them in that respect, giving them more chance of returning to full strength before it is too late.

The team ranked above them in the ratings, but only as second-favourites by the bookies, South Africa, have a lot going for them with their talented, well-balanced team and good recent form, but their history of implosion at key times under pressure must hold them back. Having said that, they are due to get it right. In Graeme Smith they have one of the feistiest leaders in the modern game, one who has been leading successfully from the front. He may not have that same calm-under-pressure mien as Vaughan, but I suspect that South Africa need the drive he provides to work at their best. They have the chance to strike early, as their first key clash comes in the group stage against Australia. One of the good things about the structure of this tournament is the way that points gained in the group phase against the other team that goes through are retained in the Super Eights, so a win over the Aussies at that stage would have the double benefit of a psychological boost and points to keep. Whoever wins that match will start to feel that things are going their way.

England’s group match against New Zealand will be in the same category. Despite having beaten them when it mattered most in the Commonwealth Bank series, England will have noted how strongly the Kiwis recovered in that Chappell-Hadlee Trophy.

England must feel that they are stronger than they were in February, with Vaughan back in charge and fit, hopefully, with Kevin Pietersen also fit again and with spirits so much higher knowing that they have beaten the best in their latest matches.

Those victories, however, owed so much to one man, Paul Collingwood, of whom much is obviously expected in the West Indies.

As for the bowlers, I have some concerns for Liam Plunkett. Most of his wickets came through swing, and with no day-night cricket in the World Cup I would like to wait and see how the attack shapes up in the next couple of weeks before making grand predictions about England’s chances of extended glory in this tournament.

Day games in the Caribbean mean bowlers will not get any assistance from changing conditions as the match moves from one phase to the other, as tends to happen under lights. What remains to be seen, with most of the pitches either new or relaid, is how much assistance the bowlers will get from the surfaces. If it is the surfaces that play up more than the atmosphere, or if they turn out to be beautifully true, the bowlers who put the ball consistently in the right place, the Glenn McGraths of this world, will derive most benefit.

That has not exactly been England’s forte, so I am waiting to see how they and the other teams work out how to bowl over the next couple of months.