Graphic: what a difference a year makes | Match report: Germany 1 England 2 | Capello's 24-carat gold reserves | How England rated | Debate: what is England's best XI now? | Agbonlahor merits inclusion in long-term plans | Rise and rise of Captain Responsible | Wenger eyes Walcott compensation | Giles Smith: was it meaningful enough to put I'm a Celebrity on hold for a night? | Debate: were Carson and Bent the only losers in Berlin?

Barely five minutes had passed after the 2-1 victory over Germany on Wednesday when Fabio Capello, the England manager, was confronted with one of football's most enduring clichés: the selection headache. It goes like this: a manager loses his best player, one who has played well and done little wrong all season and is replaced for one match by an understudy who, because the team are successful and high on confidence, also does well.

After the game, questioners proceed to treat the two players as if their records are comparable, asking the manager if, on the back of this single good game, he is considering dropping the man who was, until 90 minutes ago, the cornerstone of his team, querying whether he now has a selection problem or “headache”.

The manager, because he wishes to be polite but does not wish to dampen the enthusiasm of the reserve, chooses not to question the intellectual worth of this inquiry, but replies that it is a nice problem to have. Both parties laugh, as if some amusing insight has been gleaned, and in the next match the manager sensibly picks the best player again.

In Berlin, Capello met the baby-out-with-the-bathwater lobby halfway. He did the line about wanting to have tough choices to make, but chose not to engage beyond that. Certainly, he gave no encouragement to those who would snatch defeat from victory over Germany by allowing the reserves to annex the first team.

In so much of the reaction to what was a momentous win, the point of non-competitive internationals has been missed. This was not a trial to see who could replace Rio Ferdinand, Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard and Wayne Rooney, because they do not require replacement, but who could do the job if they were injured, suspended or had lost form. The result is that Capello surely feels much happier with the depth of his squad than he did going into the game. It does not mean that a crowd-pleasing cull is on the way.

Some people have the memory of goldfish. To recap, English football is not in crisis. Most of the players who were missing on Wednesday had enjoyed significant roles in the most successful start of any England team to a World Cup qualifying campaign. England have won all four competitive matches this year and, of the eight first-team players missing in Berlin, Rooney, Lampard and Theo Walcott started all of them, Ashley Cole, Emile Heskey and Ferdinand three of four, Gerrard two and Joe Cole one. What increasingly appears to be a grudging, envious streak in some supporters may wish to deny them, but there is absolutely no reason to interfere greatly with England's starting XI.

There would appear to be a vacancy at right back and the first good young goalkeeper will surely challenge David James, but to assume that the traditional trouble spot on the left side of midfield is still a work in progress means blotting out memory of the win against Belarus in Minsk, when Gerrard won many man-of-the-match accolades from precisely that position.

Gerrard could start on the right in the friendly against Spain in February and Stewart Downing, arguably the best player on the pitch in Berlin, could play left, but when Walcott returns later in the season the pecking order may be restored again.

When, after a landmark result such as this, little changes, it is often asked what is the point of turning up and playing well in the friendly games if a good performance does not register? Yet, if Capello makes sweeping alterations on the back of one match with nothing tangible at stake, it could equally be asked what is the point in winning four qualifying games on the bounce? The idea that Gerrard, Lampard and the Manchester United players missed the game because they did not fancy it is misguided.

Capello was right to run fitness checks, particularly after the inconsiderate way he was treated by Liverpool before the matches against Andorra and Croatia in September, but it transpired that the players were genuinely injured and, like John Terry, would have played if they could.

That so many from the elite clubs were missing merely indicates the physical strain that these players endure. Indeed, given the Barclays Premier League, Champions League, cup and England commitments, plus international tournaments in the close season every two years - except 2008, more is the pity - it would seem that many top footballers play with injury constantly.

Weekly for their clubs they get on with it, resting only when it is possible - in the League Cup, for instance - or when the pain becomes too serious. Then an international friendly comes along. You can't take a risk in that as well, the manager says. Some comply, others are more bullish about joining up. Yet, when scanned, the injury presents itself and the player returns home. In all likelihood, this is what happened with England this week.

The withdrawals appeared sinister and Capello was correct not to take every sick-note at face value, but with hindsight, and with the exception of the injury to Walcott, English football has done well from this game. Capello has demonstrated he is no soft touch, the players who needed a rest have had one and those who came in have shown a depth to the squad that few suspected.

It is foolish to leave good players out to make a point, but it does no harm to let them know that with any drop in standard there is the potential for replacement. And after Wednesday's win, Capello can make that clear without dire warnings or speeches.

“When I saw the list of injuries I was not happy, but I always - always - thought the glass of wine was half-full,” Capello said. “This is the situation to understand the players better. All have to know what they must do in the game and know the spirit of the group. This is a very big result because it is a message for everyone, from the oldest to the youngest. And this is important.”

He did not sound like a man with much of a headache. And reviewing his first year in charge of England, why should he be?