England have become the second best Test team in the world by persevering with selections - so to ditch such a policy when beaten once by the best would be premature and could be ultimately damaging.
Frustration from all quarters, given the excitement of the seemingly endless buildup to the Ashes, should not spill over into rash decision-making.
Michael Vaughan's team were anxious to get at the Australians early and it showed at Lord's, where the pace of the match, catalysed by a heady atmosphere, spun them through all kinds of emotions inside the first day and where they grabbed overeagerly at their chances in the field rather than relax and allow catches to come to them.
It was as if they could not wait for their opportunities to show they are the unit most equipped to take on Australia right now and that they are the England team most likely to wrest back the Ashes since they was lost in 1989. The plain fact is, regardless of the 239-run defeat, they are right on both counts.
That is as good a reason as any for the three selectors, who meet this week, to select the XI who played at Lord's in the squad for the match starting at Edgbaston a week tomorrow.
Mike Gatting, skipper when England last regained the Ashes, agrees with the need for continuity in selection. He said: "I wouldn't make any changes to either team. That would be a kneejerk reaction at this stage. England must now regroup and get some runs.
"England have to play at their very best to beat Australia. Their batting and catching was not up to standard and they got soundly beaten at Lord's."
A week ago the dust had settled on Graham Thorpe's omission and the only debate was whether Kevin Pietersen's technique at Test level would match the temperament of his first nine months of international cricket. He was drafted in as one of the best 11 cricketers in England, the ones the team management and indeed the vast majority of the British public believed could do the job.
All that has changed is that the world's No 1-rated team, statistically the best side in Test cricket history, have done something that has become their second nature. They have won. Again.
They did so at a venue which has become their home from home, a ground where they were last beaten in a Test in 1934.
Perhaps the series should have opened at Edgbaston, scene of a first Test win over Australia in 1997, but that does not alter the fact England trail 1-0 in a series they have primed themselves for.
One alteration to the party could be the call-up of Paul Collingwood, whose only two Test appearances were in Sri Lanka two winters ago, in place of fast bowler Chris Tremlett.
Collingwood, who yesterday scored 181 not out for Durham against Somerset at Taunton, would offer an alternative to Warwickshire's Ashley Giles if the Edgbaston pitch was unlikely to aid spin.
Slotting in at No 7, Collingwood would lengthen the batting, add vigour in the field and be a tidy fifth bowling option. Introducing an extra batsman is a negative move, however; it failed spectacularly at the same venue in the 2001 Ashes.
Being overstacked in one department leaves a team deficient in another and Vaughan, who likes balance in his attack, would rue the lack of spin if Australia batted last.
To ditch Giles would be wrong. England did not score enough runs at Lord's for conventional spin to be effective. His art is a world apart from that of Shane Warne yet it served England well during their record-breaking success.
Employed mostly as a defensive foil whose spells allow pacemen to rest, the 32-year-old orthodox off-spinner took 28 wickets in the final five Tests last summer.
The evidence of the past year, not the past week, will be of greatest value - now is not the time to panic.