Yesterday’s victory by England against Australia was above all Andrew Flintoff’s great consolation, an overdue measure of natural justice for a man more sinned against than sinning. It was a deserved redressing of the balance after a tour of crushing defeats and disappointments. Winning the triangular series is an achievement not to be underestimated, even though it must and will be dwarfed in the memory by Australia’s undiluted triumph in the Ashes.

Now for some realism. In one-day terms, the only tournament to have anything like the same importance as a leading Test series is the World Cup and for England to have their best chance of maintaining their recent momentum when they start their campaign in the Caribbean, against New Zealand on March 16, Michael Vaughan has to be restored as captain when the team is announced on Wednesday.

Vaughan has had no personal success since he lifted the Ashes urn in September 2005. He has fought a courageous, often lonely, battle for fitness since a fourth knee operation last June. He has trained for countless hours in the interests of his cricketing and financial future and there have been times when it seemed contrary to the cause of Flintoff and the rest of the team. From the moment that he was able fully to get involved, however, Vaughan’s influence on a bemused and battered team was evident. At last there was some honest admission of the mistakes that were made — those well-aired failures of selection, underpreparation and tactical nous at crucial moments. At last there was a firm hand on the tiller.

Vaughan the batsman managed to play in only two games before cruelly — but providentially for Flintoff’s self-esteem — his left hamstring twanged just when his right knee was looking strong enough to take the strain. He made 26 in a match against Australia in which some order was restored to England’s performance, then only 17 in the first win in the tournament against New Zealand; also the first win of any kind on the tour.

When he returned for the key game against New Zealand, not fully fit, he was out first ball, but in the tightest of finishes his resourceful bowling changes were crucial. Without him, England would narrowly have lost that game and missed the chance to produce their rousing finish in the finals.

It is not for his consistent underperformance with the bat that Vaughan should lead, assuming, naturally, that there is genuine confidence about his fitness. He has an average of only 27 after 77 games and a scoring rate of only 68 runs per 100 balls, or 4.11 an over. But England have won more one-day games than they have lost when he has played and lost 61 per cent of those played without him since his debut in Sri Lanka in 2001. His experience of winning matches in the West Indies must surely outweigh Mal Loye’s greater weight of stroke, but Loye has just about earned his place in the squad of 15, who, almost by serendipity, have now virtually picked themselves.

England have two different types of leader when Vaughan plays: Flintoff the champion all-rounder, free to play without having to worry about the rest of the side, and Vaughan the thinker, who can control a game because he reads it better than anyone. With Paul Collingwood and Flintoff in their recent match-winning form, they also possess two genuine one-day all-rounders. A truly outstanding all-rounder in the limited-overs game scores substantial runs quicker than he takes significant wickets. Flintoff has a scoring rate of 5.3 runs an over and a bowling economy rate of 4.4. Collingwood has weaker figures — batting rate 4.42, bowling rate 4.97 — but is scarcely less influential.

How strange that after a tour that went so disastrously for so long, England should suddenly be among the favourites to unseat everyone’s World Cup favourites, Australia. It makes for a fairer context in which to place the interim report to be made by Ken Schofield’s committee before the tournament starts. England’s shortcomings when it mattered most have been very well examined already.

What has not been asked is why the ECB, pressurised by the Professional Cricketers’ Association, has allowed the team to become too mollycoddled. The ECB’s obsession with commercial matters has to be seen as part of the problem. Why, for example, does it allow the sale of replica England caps when the baggy green remains so sacred to Australia’s players?

Under Duncan Fletcher, the coach, and his successive official captains, Nasser Hussain and Vaughan, England have got their attitude to training and practice just about right most of the time. They still have room to improve, however, both in the depth of their commitment and in fine points that make a difference, such as athleticism in fielding, running between the wickets and footwork in batting.

More emphasis on these things, and less on keeping the wives happy when they go shopping, is essential. So is a better balance between time spent in the gym and the nets and in the middle, playing hard matches at the start of each tour and at carefully selected times later.