Mark Nicholas summed up the prevailing attitude when he interviewed Paul Collingwood for Channel Five's highlights programme on Saturday evening and began with a Paxmanesque: "That wasn't good enough, was it?" For a split second, the Spin wondered whether Collingwood was going to retaliate by ruffling Nicholas's hair, but the moment passed and instead he embarked on some pre-learned waffle about a young team moving forward etc blah.
And yet. Pre-learned and waffle though it was, Collingwood had a point. Which, after all, would we rather: short-term success using players who will not be around in four years' time, or a very gradual rebuilding process that will give England the chance to compete properly in a World Cup for the first time in nearly 20 years? If we start throwing our hands up in despair already and saying "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" in a very poor accent, we will be forgetting the unanimous call after the recent World Cup to prepare well in advance for the next.
It has been pointed out once or twice since Saturday that England are still making the same mistakes as they were in the Caribbean, with particular focus on the number of runs they leaked in the last 10 overs at Edgbaston (102) and Trent Bridge (116). But in the two World Cup games against half-decent sides in which England bowled first, their last 10 overs cost them only 52 (against Sri Lanka) and 50 (West Indies). And both Sri Lanka and West Indies entered those last 10 overs with six wickets in hand: in other words, the platform was there.
What cost England in the NatWest Series was not the lack of penetration of Dimitri Mascarenhas, who went for 3.50 runs per over and was the stingiest bowler on either side. It was the failure of the quicker bowlers to think for themselves at the death. This could be Allan Donald's chance to shine (and pick Darren Gough's brain while he's at it).
The truth is that England have tried to move things on since the Caribbean. They have promoted Matt Prior, a boundary-hitter, into the top three, and have chosen to invest in Alastair Cook's obvious class. Both moves will take time to bear fruit, but they are the result of a far more coherent thought process than the one which insisted on trying to kickstart innings during the World Cup with one player who is at best a future Test No5 (Ed Joyce) and another who might never play one-day internationals again (Michael Vaughan).
The fielding, though, is a worry. England have sacrificed a huge strength by moving Paul Collingwood away from backward point to attend to captaincy duties - Ian Bell's drop of Chris Gayle on Saturday in precisely that position was one of those Sod's Law moments. And Owais Shah, for all his stylish excellence with the bat, is one of those one-day no-nos: a batsman who doesn't field. Jonty Rhodes cannot arrive quickly enough.
The process of developing a new team takes time, as one or two more sober observers have pointed out. England miss Andrew Flintoff, Ravi Bopara, and they have never replaced Marcus Trescothick. Things could yet fall into place. For once, let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
This is an extract from Lawrence Booth's weekly email, The Spin
