To suggest anyone other than India at this point is ridiculous, because neither Australia or England can beat India home or away. Australia can’t even beat India at home.
aussies should have lost to England, England are a bit too gung ho/bazballsy for their own good, great when your bowlers can keep you in the game and usually helpful conditions to eg Anderson, but seems to be unravelling
many will pinpoint X, Y or Z, name and blame eg Bairstow, but fact is you can't go to India, biff, bash, bosh and expect to build a total with no substance.
Three centuries granted, but take away each of 1-7s HS and apart from Crawley who got to fifty FOUR times then got out before he reached 80 the rest averaged 22 or less from their other 9 innings..... bazballs may well work for players like Duckett and Crawley, think it doesn't really with the rest and they don't know whether to stick or twist
aussies were lucky to survive in the Ashes, gifted a win in the 1st Test thanks to a dopey declaration and then England not being able to polish off their lower order in the 2nd innings, fortunate with the rain - fortunate if it saves you, unfortunate if it doesn't, happens for you sometimes, against you other times.
so on balance India who have a strong home record, and yet in spite of being spin central produced also Bumrah, Siraj and Shami with a decent batting line up that if not undone by swing is usually as strong as any side.
can't see past India, be a laugh to see if anyone voted England, would have thought kiwis might have been the third or simply go with 4-5 and "Other"