Why all the overnight agonising? Wasn’t it bleeding obvious that an epic Test match in Chittagong would come to its conclusion via two umpire reviews and the ball in the hands of Ben Stokes?

Well, no. But it transpires that Alastair Cook and his advisors came to a very satisfactory conclusion as they contemplated how they would prevent Bangladesh creating a bit of history. They opted for the pacemen and with Stokes grabbing the last two wickets – to finish the match with the startling figures of six for 46 – England won a compelling contest by 22 runs.

The overnight break in play was a boon for the tourists. It allowed them to regroup and refresh, while the Bangladesh trio, who could still influence proceedings, probably had too much time to contemplate their challenge. Moreover history favoured England in these circumstances. England have played just three Tests when their opponents went to bed needing less than 40 for victory with two or less wickets in hand. In 1925 in Adelaide and in 1982 at Melbourne they defeated Australia; in 1998 at Headingley they beat South Africa with the help of a few dodgy lbw decisions.

Here England’s win would be achieved via two lbw decisions that were not necessarily dodgy but were unusual. And both inevitably took place at Kumar Dharmasena’s end. How much will the Sri Lankan be looking forward to his next engagement in Dhaka on Friday, after eight out of his 15 decisions have been overturned here?

Cook opted for his pacemen from the start, which was the equivalent of sticking rather than twisting in blackjack.

Afterwards he explained how wanted to prolong the game because that gave more time to create chances. He was never going to mention that his faith in his spinners on a pitch where the turn has often been extravagant was not absolute.

So Stuart Broad was given the ball for the first over. There was a modest crowd, all of whom were huddling in the shade often out of sight, but never out of earshot. Three runs came from that first over from the bat of Sabbir Rahman, who looked inclined to trust his partner rather than launch an early extravagant attack.

Stokes decided to bounce Taijul Islam as soon as he got him on strike. He banged the ball into the pitch at a perfect angle at shoulder height. Taijul swished belatedly and the ball hit his glove only to pass agonisingly over the head of Jonny Bairstow and on to the boundary.

Another Broad over yielded two runs. Was Cook beginning to contemplate a spinner, possibly with the second new ball? To his relief this conundrum vanished from his mind in the space of three deliveries of Stokes’s second over.

The first one brushed the pads of the left-handed Taijul and the ball scurried towards fine leg. The batsmen ran two; England opted to review. At first glance this may have seemed like desperation – since 80 overs had passed they now had two reviews available.

But the replay demonstrated how Taijul had made an exaggerated movement to the off-side; his was not a conventional leg-glance. Dharmasena, possibly fooled by the shot attempted by Taijul, declined to raise his finger but the dreaded three reds appeared on the screen and for the last time in the match Dharmasena crossed his arms in front of his chest and changed his decision.

Out came Shafiul Islam, who has a half century to his name against England. His first delivery was misdirected down the leg side and Bairstow, who, while being far from flawless, had responded doughtily to the challenge of keeping in very demanding conditions, prevented any byes.

The next ball was better directed. It thudded into Shafiul’s left pad. Up went the England team; up went Dharmasena’s finger, while the third umpire Ravi prepared for his last and 26th intervention of the match. The ball had struck the pad outside the line of off-stump, which provoked a green light, and it was then revealed that it was going to clip the top of off-stump, which triggered an orange light. However the umpires decided that Shafiul was not attempting to play a shot when the ball struck his pad. Hence Dharmasena could raise his finger again and the match was over.

Who can be sure of Shafiul’s intentions to play a shot? The TV pictures indicated that his bat was a long way from the ball; he jabbed it down posthumously as Stokes delivery darted inwards. This was a tough way to lose the match but it was a legitimate decision.

So England can head to Dhaka one up in the series. They do so cheerfully but they are a little more wary about expressing their relief that they had avoided their first defeat to Bangladesh in this form of the game.

Bangladesh, so spirited and so skilful, had come very close to a landmark victory. England have sweated buckets for the cause; their commitment throughout the five days has been unstinting, but this should not disguise obvious frailties, which could be ruthlessly exposed in India if there is no improvement. There are concerns about the first four, though there is the considerable consolation of knowing that Cook and Joe Root will surely make significant contributions along the way.

The same confidence is unlikely to extend to the spinning department. Cook was careful to offer his spin bowlers mild plaudits after the game, which is no surprise for that is what captains must do, but his decision-making tells another story. On a track designed for spinners Cook turned to his pacemen when the match was hovering in the balance on Sunday night; the key factor was that Cook knew he could trust them and on a Monday morning in Chittagong, when history was not made, his faith in them was repaid again.