It would be preferable, of course, if their fightback proved to be the start of the Great England Revival, which strengthened into victory over South Africa in the next two Tests, then a thumping of Sri Lanka - who start their tour today - at the Oval. By the Ashes series in November, England could then look any Australian in the wrinkled eye.
The evidence, however, points to England chugging along as they have done for the last dozen years (the glorious uncertainty of cricket applies to the detail, like the denouement at Old Trafford, rather than to the sweep of a five-Test series). England, as they are, will not win anything more significant than the occasional Test match. On the other hand, they will not sink so low that revolution will threaten their places or the established order of our cricket.
England's fielding is not fibrous like that of a winning team. A whiff of every man for himself is being exuded too, which is usually the case when England are playing poorly. But it was not so when England were pulling together at their best under Mike Atherton, as in two Barbados Tests, when batsmen would back up to help a new partner get off the mark. The new captain is leading by example; the response is not yet wholehearted.
Only Atherton and Stewart have been consistent run-scorers for England so far. Stewart's 164 indeed was the highest Test innings by any captain-cum-keeper. It beat the England record by 158 runs since Capt Ronnie Stanyforth was a dashed good after-dinner speaker on the 1927-28 tour of South Africa, and not too bad with the gauntlets for an Oxford chap who never won a Blue, but wielding the old willow was always a bit of a mystery.
Not only have England been short of runs, they have also scored them too slowly - 2.22 per over, or 200 runs a day - to win Test matches. That is a justifiable rate when South Africa's pace bowlers are bowling outside off stump to a defensive, and brilliant, field. What is unjustifiable is that Paul Adams has been conceding just over two runs per over since England started patting back his half-volleys at Edgbaston when they were on top.
This slow run-rate is one of the prices England are paying for tying one hand of their best attacking opener behind his back - or rather tying both hands in gloves in front of him - and dropping Stewart down the order. As each of Atherton's opening partners has failed since Mark Butcher's 77 at Edgbaston, England have customarily been 40 for two and in no position to score at a match-winning rate.
England's bowling, by complete contrast, has been so innocuous that it is remarkable they are only 1-0 down. In three Tests England have taken 25 of the tourists' wickets, at an average of 50 runs each. The plan of five bowlers has not worked yet, perhaps partly for the same reason that playing an extra batsman seldom works: everyone leaves the responsibility to someone else. Thank heavens for Gerry Liebenberg: anyone who thinks Gerries are formidable enemies hasn't seen South Africa's painfully limited opener.
If South Africa's batting lacks the capacity to dominate, unlike Australia's, their bowling does not, so that the draw at Old Trafford can only be a temporary setback.
Before this series it was predictable that South Africa would win if Donald and Shaun Pollock were fit, and if Gary Kirsten hung on at one end. In each of the Tests so far only two of those three preconditions have occurred; if all three do, South Africa can be expected to win at Trent Bridge or Headingley and take the series.
The ever-increasing firepower of South Africa's bowling, particularly on hard wickets, and the rapidly decreasing firepower of England's, is evident from the following table. Since South Africa's readmission, England have played a three-Test series against them in England in 1994, a five-Test series in 1995-96 in South Africa, and the three this summer. Once well-matched, the two countries are no longer so, these figures suggest:
Another indictment of England's bowling is that only once since readmission have they dismissed South Africa in fewer than 100 overs, that is, in match-winning time: at the Oval in 1994, when Devon Malcolm had his ``one fierce hour and sweet'' in the words of Chesterton (G K, not G H, of Worcestershire).
The next candidate of high pace, Alex Tudor, is still too ungrooved but might be tried against Sri Lanka, who in the absence of Chaminda Vaas, have no serious pace bowler.
For want of extreme pace therefore, England will try extreme spin at Trent Bridge on Thursday week, or at any rate Ian Salisbury again. Specialist off-spinners are becoming obsolete; Mark Ramprakash is quite capable of filling in. But Robert Croft remains essential to England's one-day party for the tri-series in Australia and for the World Cup. So does Nick Knight, whose technique is too quirky - back foot back towards square leg, wrists pushed away from his body - to be compact enough to succeed regularly in Tests in Australia.
The Trent Bridge 11 is likely to be: Atherton, Butcher, Hussain, Stewart, Hick, Ramprakash, Ben Hollioake, Cork, Salisbury, Gough and Fraser, or another pace bowler such as Giddins.
Beyond sensible changes in the attempt to find a winning formula, and hard fielding practice, not much else can be done at short notice except to soldier on under Capt Stewart - and to take heart that Stanyforth ended up Lieut-Colonel.
RUNS PER WICKET
England
1994: 32
1995-96: 29
1998: 27
South Africa
1994: 34
1995-96: 31
1998: 50