I SUPPOSE it had to happen. Hard on the heels of England failing to win the first Test against Sri Lanka came the inquest into how it happened, especially when they had been so strongly placed after the first three days. But I have still been surprised by how quickly the “What about Flintoff’s captaincy?” bandwagon has gathered pace.

Yes, there were things that could be put forward as evidence of the captain missing the odd trick here and there, but then aren’t there always? The nub, as Andrew Flintoff has pointed out (along with loyal allies such as Steve Harmison) was not that he made any glaring errors as captain; it was simply that he was in charge of a team that somehow dropped an inordinate number of catches. If England had held on to half of those chances, they would have been packing their bags well before Sunday evening and there would have been little to worry about.

Flintoff, normally an utterly reliable catcher, was one of the culprits. Paul Collingwood, one of the most instinctively brilliant catchers you will ever see, also let a couple slip.

I cannot help wondering, though, whether Collingwood finds it noticeably different to be stood still at slip or gully, compared with his usual role, which is walking in at cover or point.

It is a small point, but subtle differences in technique can make the difference between a chance sticking or falling to the ground.

In essence the slip fielder has to be rock-steady, balanced and able to dive in any direction, while the point fielder has to react as he sees the shot developing and then has to steady himself like a goalkeeper to react and move accordingly.

Take one glaring example from India during the winter; in a slightly different way, Mohammad Kaif failed to adapt his well-honed cover fielding techniques to fielding close and was hopping all over the place when he should have been standing still.

So if there is anything England must focus on before the Edgbaston Test begins on Thursday, it is how they can make their hands that crucial bit stickier.

If they succeed — and it’s an area that needs urgent improvement — then everything else should fall into place and Freddie will be free to get on with doing his job.

Nevertheless, there are areas that he will do well to consider, areas that the coach, Duncan Fletcher, should discuss with him before the Test.

Improvement in these areas would help him improve on what has so far been an instinctive approach to the job. To be fair to Flintoff, it can take any captain time to get right consistently.

By the time they had finished at Lord’s, Flintoff had overbowled himself and underused Monty Panesar. The explanation is simple enough: the captain, full of energy, felt he was best qualified to make the breakthroughs required.

People have compared Lord’s to Bombay, where Flintoff did not fall into the same trap. But perhaps in Bombay his decision-making appeared all the more inspirational for the simple reason that his side took their chances.

Apart from Panesar’s embarrassment off a sky-high chance from Mahendra Dhoni — for which he thankfully made amends a few minutes later — everything worked for England and a fabulous victory was in the bag, with the captain taking the plaudits.

Those plaudits would not have been quite as forthcoming had England won at Lord’s, because the perception is that Sri Lanka, especially with their lack of depth in a relatively inexperienced team, should be easier to beat.

However, most of Flintoff’s key decisions with his attack, including the prompt taking of the various new balls available, would have brought the right results but for the bowlers passing the bat time and again rather than finding the edge and the mishaps that followed when they actually did find the edge.

Other missed opportunities were a failure to be more positive with close fielders around the bat for Panesar and the seamers. A gamble or two to apply extra pressure might have paid off.

There were times when it looked as if bowlers were on at the wrong end to best suit their abilities, but getting them at the right end at Lord’s can always be tricky. Sometimes even the bowlers themselves get it wrong, as I know only too well.

After the 1989 Ashes Test at Lord’s, I was castigated for using Neil Foster from the Pavilion End rather than at the Nursery End from which he had earlier taken a bagful of wickets.

How foolish of me as captain to ask him which end he preferred and actually let him bowl from there! I also thought that Flintoff might have bowled himself sooner and gone around the wicket more than he did when the left-handers were on strike — it was good enough to bamboozle the Australians and should be high on the agenda of good ideas for Edgbaston.

One question we will have to revisit at some time over this summer is whether Flintoff should be saddled with the captaincy in the longer term.

Michael Vaughan’s situation remains unsatisfactorily blurred, but if he is to remain out of action for a while, there might well be a good case for letting somebody else shoulder the burden of captaincy and allowing Flintoff to continue to dominate proceedings as he did last summer simply by being Freddie, the great allrounder.

I have not made my mind up on that, despite Flintoff’s initial success in India and his obvious willingness to continue in the job.

For now, though, give the man a break, let him continue to learn on the job, as any captain must, and if, by the time England have finished at Edgbaston and Trent Bridge, they are 2-0 up, then pat him on the back as hard as you dare.