What has been the one thing that has really gone wrong for England?
Shane Warne: More than one or two things have gone wrong for me. The main thing is that Alastair Cook has not been in charge enough. There have been too many people captaining the team.
He has not used enough instinct. They have had their chances against Australia in nearly every Test match to bowl them out for a cheap score in the first innings. Brad Haddin got runs and that tail wagged but look at the England tactics.
Even in Sydney in the second innings Australia were four for 90, Rankin came on to bowl and they had three men on the fence for the hook and bowled bouncers when the other 24 wickets had all fallen to pitched-up balls.
Derek Pringle: And this to a guy, George Bailey, who nicks off for a pastime.
SW: Exactly. There have just been some horrific tactical misjudgments. I'm not sure whether that has come from Andy Flower or Cook not trusting himself enough, I don't know, but tactically they have been poor.
SH: For you Derek?
DP: Basically we have not scored enough runs and I think Johnson has been a major influence on that. He has bowled quick and it shows there are not many bowlers of his pace around and that has shaken England up.
They have not been able to get back on their feet, before they knew it they were 2-0 down and by then morale is down. As Shane said, we have been in good positions bowling wise in all first innings bar Adelaide but whatever plans they have had for Haddin have been the wrong ones.
SH: It is an interesting point. A lot of people have blamed the batsmen for failing to Johnson and the tailenders for being blown away but we are highlighting the fact England's bowlers have not capitalised on four positions when Australia have been 140 for five.
SW: But I don't think it is down to the bowlers. Yes, they have not bowled well enough at times, but they have bowled pretty well to get Australia into some tough positions.
Haddin has made over 400 runs but if they had been tactically better they could have knocked Australia over a lot cheaper. I am not just trying to pick on Cook. I know I have said it for a while but I have seen some things and thought: "What are you doing?" I just don't understand it.
DP: Certainly in the first innings at Brisbane, he kept Graeme Swann on too long. Mitch Johnson joined Haddin. Cook thought "he's a left-hander and Swann has dismissed them for a pastime" but Johnson played really well. Cook allowed Johnson to get in and they were back in the game.
SH: To put it in a nutshell have England used the strategies of three years ago which was to make lots of runs and then to apply pressure with accurate bowling but maybe that blueprint is tired? It hasn't worked because the batsmen have been out of form and the bowlers have been over the edge in terms of James Anderson and Swann?
SW: I think back to the last Ashes series and Australia were not good enough when they got into positions and that is why England won 3-0. It could have been 2-2 that series. England in this series have got themselves in good positions but were not quite good enough to finish Australia off.
DP: Over here the new ball is important. Both teams have had the other in trouble but the difference is Johnson with the old ball can still frighten you out and get wickets.
SW: Don't underestimate Nathan Lyon's role. I'm not trying to pump Michael Clarke up but the way he has used Lyon, Johnson, Ryan Harris and co has been outstanding.
And with Cook over-bowling Swann... any doubts and he just bowls Anderson for nine-over spells. I just think Australia have been tactically better, and also better at playing a more aggressive brand of cricket.
If you are in doubt about what to do then if you go on the aggressive approach you are not going to go too far wrong. England have gone cautious, pushed fielders back and that has allowed people to get singles and twos and the tail to wag.
DP: Another tactical boo-boo by Cook was during Haddin's recovery with Steve Smith here on day one when he bowled Anderson and Stuart Broad too long together after lunch and therefore once he did not get a wicket he had novices to bowl at them and they recovered.
SH: You are obviously critical of Cook. Would you keep him as captain?
SW: I think he has to be given a bit longer and see how he responds from this. They have Sri Lanka and then India and I would wait until the end of the EngliSH: summer and say 'Right ho, where are we at with the team?' A few of these guys will still be around.
SH: Derek, would you give him more time?
DP: Absolutely. Alastair Cook delivered a win in India which has not happened in 28 years. And he has won an Ashes series and he is only a year old as a captain.
SW: He is the perfect person to captain really. He is a good bloke. He has a good changing room, he has the respect of his team-mates but needs to improve tactically.
DP: He leads from the front but it has gone badly with the bat which undermines him slightly.
SH: So we are keeping Cook as captain. What about the coaching set-up? What about Flower and all his support staff? Are there too many? Does that need changing?
SW: I think the ECB has to go to Cook and say: 'How do you want to captain this side?' It should be down to who he wants. If he believes Flower is a good coach with lots to offer then fine. If he thinks it is time for new ideas then they need to look at that, too.
But they have to ask the captain. He has to take charge of this team and say: "This is how we want to play. And this is what I stand for," because the wins and losses go against his name and he has to start trusting his instinct better and say: "These are the guys I want around." Graham Gooch should stay because he is a good batting coach. Flower should stay if Cook wants him. If there is someone with newer, freSH: ideas then go get them.
SH: KP? Michael Vaughan wrote in The Sunday Telegraph that he should be made vice-captain. Where do you sit on that?
DP: I think it is difficult for someone who has been captain once to have a reduction in power and you are better off being part of the ranks. KP is an important player.
He has a lot of experience and Vaughan's other point is he is really good with young players but he can still play that role without being vice-captain. Vaughany is just worried Cook is not getting good advice as captain. Swann was his right-hand man on the field, he has left the game and Matt Prior is out at the moment.
SH: Shane, would you like more involvement for KP because he has been detached in this series?
SW: He has spent too long fielding on the fence. SH: He is a photo opportunity, fielding on the boundary, signing autographs and doesn't seem to be involved. I think either use him fully or not at all.
SW: You would love him to be more involved. To me he has a wonderful cricket brain. I lived with him for six months and I saw the way he thought about the game. He has a good imagination. It was a tough time when he became captain with the coaching staff. Is it time to revisit it?
Would it put too much pressure on Cook if KP is vice-captain? Someone has to do the job. At the moment Prior is out, Swann has gone so it might be a good time to put him in as vice-captain.
DP: He might think differently and you need someone to stir things up and look at it from a different viewpoint.
SH: What about the wicketkeeper? I like Prior. I think it was a mistake to drop him.
SW: It saved his career missing these two Tests.
SH: You are right. He looked shellshocked.
SW: If he had kept keeping the way he was, and didn't make runs then there would have been no coming back. They would have given someone else the chance next summer. He would be gone then. I think he will start the first Test next summer.
SH: He has become a better keeper by not playing because England have realised what they have missed and Jonny Bairstow does not look good enough.
SW: He's all over the place.
DP: Against someone quick like Johnson he has problems.
SH: What about bowlers? Swann has gone. Who do we pick?
SW: I think Monty Panesar would have bowled really well on this pitch in Sydney. Scott Borthwick has got something but we did not see enough of him. He bowled his third over when it was all over.
SH: Have you seen anything in him to say he has got some potential?
SW: He only bowled 13 overs in the match. I would have liked to see him bowling in Sydney when it was turning. He was picked in the side to bowl but they didn't use him.
DP: The trouble is England's approach to the game is to create pressure and someone like him, unless he is taking wickets regularly, he goes at six an over and it is hard to keep a lid on it. SH: You played your first Test here?
DW Yes, I got one for 150. But I bowled 50 overs.
SH: You can see why they picked him?
SW: Yes he has got a number of things. He spins the ball when it lands but he bowled a little bit of loose stuff and that is understandable because he is playing his first Test. He was nervous and bowling at a tough time.
He wasn't used much. He was given ordinary fields. If he had a regulation field in his first over he would have taken a wicket at short cover.
DP: But even at county level he is not the regular spinner. Durham have brought him in occasionally to be main spinner but often someone else is ahead of him.
SH: So you think Panesar and Borthwick are not a bad pair. England just need to believe in them a bit more?
SW: Yes and if you continue to play Stokes as an all-rounder, you can play Panesar and Borthwick as well. Panesar can do a job like a third seamer, he does not go for many runs, and then you can have your leggie.
SH: Even though England are going down 5-0 it doesn't sound like the team needs a total revamp. You both feel, and I do too, that the culture just needs a bit of tinkering. I feel there is a bit of tension in the team.
They feel they have to perform at every juncture and a very heavy analysis is being conducted on them all the time. They feel a bit tense and tentative. Perhaps the culture coaching is too intense. Darren Lehmann has relaxed all his players.
SW: It is easy to have fun when you are winning. Look, even though England have lost 5-0 here and lost horribly, there have been signs with England to say, 'Let's not panic too much', but everyone has to look and start with the coaching staff, work their way down and ask, 'Are they the best person for the job?' If the answers are 'Yes, they are good enough', then that is OK. But there has to be a plan for looking forward. England have lacked a plan since first Test in Brisbane.
SH: Where they were taken aback.
SW: Yes. Don't underestimate the job Johnson has done. That sheer pace - England did not expect that. They will say they did not underestimate Australia but I think that is absolute rubbish. They underestimated Australia.
DP: England landed in Brisbane and three things hit them. Johnson, the local press and the crowd. It took them by surprise.
SW: Yes and I think they have been in shock since then, too. All their decisions have been panicked with no plan. That is what can happen when you get rattled.
SH: Is 5-0 a fair scoreline?
DP: On how they have played, yes. They have not been unlucky, put it that way. SW: If there were seven Test matches it would have been 7-0.