With Ben Stokes' inclusion in the England squad for the Ashes - and further revelations overnight - the story has received plenty of attention in the Australian press. Here is a selection of what has been written.

In the Sydney Morning Herald, Andrew Wu articulated the central problem for the ECB:

"There was a feeling in Australian cricket circles on Thursday that there was no way the ECB could allow Stokes to play in this summer's Ashes, with some saying the board risked becoming a laughing stock if he toured. There is also a belief that an Australian player would have had his contract torn up had he behaved in such a way.

"Stokes, however, is a player of rare ability and whom England can ill afford to lose if they are to have success in Australia."

Fox Sports compared the Stokes incident with David Warner's infamous swing at Joe Root in the Birmingham Walkabout in 2013:

"So far an embarrassingly soft approach by the ECB has vowed to bow to legal process on the matter, but if Stokes is charged and summonsed to face court when the Ashes series is on in Australia it could be difficult for him to tour.

"Stokes is no chance of surviving as vice-captain, but there is enormous pressure on the ECB to sack him and tear up his contract altogether for bringing the sport into disrepute.

"Cricket Australia were quick to come down hard and suspend David Warner for his scuffle with Joe Root on the eve of the 2013 Ashes, an incident which was child's play in comparison to the evidence piling up against Stokes."

Malcolm Knox, in the Age, suggested that Stokes should face a "lengthy ban" for his behaviour, if the ECB can see past his importance to the team:

"That agonised moaning heard from Lord's around the world is not a group yoga session loosening some stiff upper lips, but English cricket authorities contorting themselves into a pretzel in an attempt to retain both Ben Stokes and their principles.

"England's desperate desire to win the series in Australia can be measured by Stokes not having been sacked by Wednesday. Making the all-important presumption that Stokes is the same redhead known as "Stokes" in the video of this week's incident in Bristol, throwing punches in the street, visibly intimidating his victims, while his team-mate Alex Hales is allegedly begging him to stop, the case is surely open and shut. Stokes cannot possibly tour Australia and must face a lengthy ban from cricket.

"And yet … and yet … Stokes is an incalculably important cricketer to England and to the Ashes series overall. Stokes is arguably the most talented player across both teams and the most likely individual key to the outcome. In the last Ashes series in Australia, he was the sole Englishman to score a century, he destroyed Australia with the ball in the series-winning Test match of 2015, and he has got better and better since then. With six Test hundreds and 95 wickets, he is as pivotal to England's hopes as Andrew Flintoff and Ian Botham were to their last two series wins in Australia. England want him so much to play in this Ashes series, there have already been conversations about how to orchestrate some kind of ritual punishment - stripping the vice-captaincy, some kind of limited suspension - without actually banning him from the Test matches."

And in the Brisbane Courier-Mail, Ben Horne raised the spectre of Kevin Pietersen:

"The man who permanently banished Kevin Pietersen from international cricket risks being judged a hypocrite if he lets Ben Stokes play for England again, let alone tour Australia for the Ashes.

"Former England captain Andrew Strauss is the ECB's respected director of cricket, but his reputation will live or die by the action he takes on Stokes after graphic video footage captured a man alleged to be the allrounder assaulting a man outside a Bristol nightclub.

"Strauss was widely praised for the strength of character he showed in calling out Pietersen for the toxic impact he was having on the England dressing room and slamming the door shut in the superstar batsman's face, marking his cards never to play again.

"However, it is difficult to draw such a decisive line in the sand on Pietersen, who was at the end of the day nothing more than a disruptive force, and then not come down like a ton of bricks on Stokes for his alleged part in a sickening act of violence that could have ended far more tragically for the 27-year-old man on the receiving end who was sent to hospital with facial injuries."