This interpretation of Admiral Andrew Cunningham's response depends largely on what happened to the officers after Gloucester's loss. Cunningham was reserved, his surviving papers are unusually pristine, and he preferred a quiet corrective conversation when he thought an officer could learn from it. Officers he considered unable to learn were removed from independent decisions or placed where senior staff could constrain them. The later postings of commanders involved around Crete are indirect personnel evidence rather than a written rebuke. Accountability could operate through appointments as well as through a court martial.
Chapter · 34:01-36:11
Gloucester's sinking and Cunningham's quiet accountability
Cunningham's later personnel choices provide indirect evidence of his judgment about the commanders involved in Gloucester's loss.