With Australia leading the Ashes series 3-0 and only the Sydney Test to play, Mr Franks says the gulf between the two bowling attacks has been the difference between Australia and England this time round.

But he is not convinced about the home side’s batting, either.

“The [Australian] selectors have either been geniuses or luck has ridden with them,” he said.

Mr Franks said all-rounder Ben Stokes - who is being investigated by police over a street fight in Bristol - would have made a big difference to England, but could not have been named in the visitors’ squad.

“His [Stokes’] presence would have provided an important cricketing contribution but also a psychological contribution because of his ability to turn a match,” he said.

Mr Franks is a former long-time Charles Sturt University lecturer and editor of Wisden Australia.

His specialist subject was Anglo-Australian Test cricket from 1920 to 1961 when he appeared on the ABC television show Mastermind in 1979 and 1980 – and he made it to the semi-finals both times.

He said it was unusual for a team to win away from home in contemporary Test cricket because conditions favoured the home side so heavily and this was clear in English bowlers James Anderson and Stuart Broad’s lack of effectiveness in Australia.

“But I still think there are question marks over the Australian batting,” he said.

West Australian Cameron Bancroft, he said, could best be described using the Scottish legal system’s verdict of “not proven”. 

Shaun Marsh, “quite an enigmatic batsman”, has nine half-centuries and five centuries to his name in Tests – as well as eight ducks.

“Like the curate's egg, it's good in parts,” Mr Franks said.

And Mitchell Marsh? 

“Allegedly, he's there because of his all-round capability. But the hunt for an Australian all-rounder is like the hunt for the Tasmanian Tiger - we don't know whether it exists or not.”