Hard question to answer - there are so many inponderables attached: - can England ever get what is currently considered their best bowling attack on the park at the one time again? - how much will the Aussie team decline? - and, can the English selectors find a happy middle path between the headless-chook chopping and changing of the not-so-distant past and the bloody-minded obstinacy that was displayed during the 06/07 Ashes?
IF it is to happen, a few pieces need to fall into place. First, England needs to find bowlers who can consistently take wickets away from home. That's why Paneser is exciting for them, and why I think some of the persistance with Harmison has been justified (although that's now been overdone). Hoggard has improved in this respect, but still sometimes looks decidedly tame when the balls not swinging. Second, at least some of England's quality players who are currently under serious injury clouds need to regain some consistent fitness: ie. Trescothick, Vaughan, and especially, inevitably, Flintoff. Three, somewhat contradicting my immediately preceding point, England have to accomodate themselves to the likely reality that Flintoff is going to be a bonus if and when he's able to produce. He's been battling different injuries for a long time, and it doesn't seem feasible to plan a team and a strategy around the idea that Freddie will provide the inspirational leadership for the team with his fast, aggressive and lengthy spells of quality pace, before knocking off a quick half-century with the bat. If they can find the players to be confident of being a top-notch team without Flintoff, then they'll be extremely well placed if and when he is about to produce his best.
They have a solid core of a batting line up, and at least one good long-term bowling prospect in Paneser. There also seem to be a few guys around the edge of the bowling attack like Broad who could be good, so they should be a decent team for a while. But I think the smart money is on Australia continuing as the number one team for a while, albeit maybe not as brutally dominant as they have been for much of the previous decade.