No need to panic but England have big decisions to make for Lord’s

So, where do England go from here? After coming up short in a teeming, undulating first Ashes Test at Edgbaston, one that left combatants and spectators drained but richer for it, the smart-alec answer here is Lord’s.

There are five full days off first, however, with England not due to resume training until Monday; time to reflect on the one that got away, rest some weary legs and pop Moeen Ali’s sore spinning finger in a pot of piddle. Australia were rightly buzzing after their two-wicket heist, renditions of True Blue (John Williams, not Madonna) and Under the Southern Cross I Stand echoing late into the night. But on the other side of the dressing room wall, the hosts were not too blue in defeat.

Memories of 2005 have been baked into the narrative of this series and it is worth going back there. England went 1-0 down in the first Test, faced headlines such as “Vaughan again losers” and calls for changes in the team. But they held their nerve, stuck to the principles that underpinned a 12-month rise and struck back.

Back then it was a 239-run pasting inflicted by Glenn McGrath; this time it was Australia bucking a trend of coming second in Ashes close finishes by securing their tightest win by wickets over England since 1907. History may be more or less bunk but, equally, there is no need for Ben Stokes to get all Corporal Jones just yet.

As superb as Pat Cummins and Nathan Lyon were during that tense final hour, after a couple of sparkling second-innings bowling performances by donning capes with bat in hand, England will know they made most of the running. They also made most of the errors; those old-as-time non‑negotiables that hold true whether a team are good, bad or on an evangelical mission to reinvent/save Test