75 thoughts on “Rate the match: New Zealand v England

  1. A solid 7 for me, with the script sort of written by half time. It always felt to me like England were tough, competitive and could win, but that the little extra flashes came from NZ players, so they were more likely to win. England didn’t have that little extra cohesion.

    But seriously, hats off to the team that takes a tap and go with 5 minutes to go and scores level. That’s some stones, and a very good decision in the end.

    But still, very pleasing that a number of the England players stepped up and played toe to toe.

  2. Top game, for all those who say NZ were rusty, remember this is quite a novice England team coming off an exhausting season.

    Nigel Owens, however, needed to be consistent with his cards and more observant with his knock on calls.

    One of my favourite things to come out of this is Tuilagi and Eastmond gelling quite well and taking the match to them. Still very vulnerable to attacks going wide though, so that will need addressing.

    Roll on the second match!

  3. I disagree with Woodward’s call that we didn’t score a try because we needed a playmaker in midfield. I thought we didn’t score a try because our pack, with a couple of our most dynamic options missing, didn’t contribute enough in the loose. When we got momentum and field position it just felt like the game slowed down and we eventually made an error. (not taking anything away from the set piece effort which was fantastic)

    Encouraging performance (again) but I’m not getting too carried away, we’ve looked good while not reaching our goals quite a few times recently. Hopefully it’s all building towards the world cup.

    Can’t wait for the rest of the series now.

    1. Definitely agree with you here. I though Eastmond was excellent, but a player like him is just so much better with more space to run into, and that means the forwards sucking in more defenders. Wood, and Vunipola should help with that. Haskell was great defensively, but offered very little going forwards, which is unusual for him. Morgan (apart from that one break from the scrum) was solid, but again, could have done more going forward.
      I also think Care will make a big difference to how the ball is used. Care and Farrell proved a good pairing in the 6N, and as long as they’re both fully fit, they could provide some good ball for the midfield, whoever that is!!??

  4. Wow. I thought the draw might be on but fair play to NZ in not kicking the pen with Eng down to 14. Very clever.

    Still what a performance from England. If Lancaster does revert to his 1st picks I really hope he finds space on the bench for Eastmond. Defence was fine and he is electric. I want to see more of him.

    Fair play to to SL all the calls I worried about came off.

  5. Just one big gripe for me is England’s continuing problem receiving kick offs. It’s been a problem for a while and it just relieves pressure for the opposition.

  6. Was really pleased with Eastmond. Everyone expected him to get flattened by nonu but he proved that small guys can still make it at this level. Robshaw again outclassed McCaw. Thought Manu played alright but Burrell runs better lines and often gets the offload away. Too often a great break from Manu dies with him. Which is odd because he offloads really well at Leicester.

  7. Tighter than I anticipated.

    Burns played better than expected (altho I’d still liked to have seen Cip with more game time) & England were more ‘attack ‘minded & seemed more confident in the backs than I’d prev perceived… but without scoring that try. Tui carried well enough, but a centre with an instep before passing the killer ball out wide might have reaped more divi. Yarde, Eastmond & May gave it a lash, altho the former really needs the birch for getting that yellow. Brown, his usual self, altho not too much room for him today.

    The English fwds fronted up in tight & br/down. Had the AB scrum in trouble a couple of times on their (England’s) put in. The AB fwds needed to commit more numbers to the ‘ruck’ as Engand had too much leeway there for me.

    My ‘feeling’ as the game wore on was that a try would have likely killed the match off, esp for NZ.

    However, for the nxt game they maybe should have Vito @ 8 & alt between Kaino & Messam @ 6. Also Ritchie was & has been for a bit, quiet (I know he’s been on sabbat), altho as soon as I voiced this in the rub a dub dub, he stole a gd t/over.

    Is it a case of, as with the last Irish tour, the ABs being slow starters again? Whatever, they’ll need to up the scrum, compete better @ the br/down… & those backs… & that fwd, must stop knocking the bluddy ball on! Talk about butchering 1 cert. Also need to tighten up on ‘D’ by shutting down m/field quicker… & watch the bl/side on the AB left when scrumming down near England’s line.

    ‘SCW said that both teams will ‘get better’. If so, it remains to be seen which 1 does this more than the other. Find out nxt Sat.

    On a personal note, the above comments were (mostly) more objective than I’d anticipated. Looked for reams of jingoism & gung ho fever. Hard to spot tho.

    1. We English are always like that. It’s what we built the Empire on and what makes our country so great.

    2. Yarde sacrificed himself to stop the try and shouldn’t be blamed for it, the man at fault for putting him in the position where he had to do that is Ben Youngs. The one English player who NEEDS to be dropped for the next Test, let’s hope Care recovers swiftly.

      A great match spoiled slightly by errors, but a fantastic and absorbing contest setting up what could be a truly special Test series.

  8. Benjit

    Dunno if it was clever to run the penalty or not. It was still a (calculated) risk, or, as someone who is a bit slow out of the blocks by presumably not having got out of bed to comment here as yet & comes from Wales would have said, was for ‘entertainment’ value. However, the surely ABs wanted the win & @ that stage, esp with Yarde still off (?), they must have considered it, in the words of Jonathan Woss, a ‘whisk worth taking’.

    1. That was kind of my point. Good heads up rugby. England were not only a man down but had switched off a bit expecting the kick to goal.

  9. Really a good match for the England side, they should have won.The All Blacks lacked passion, they seemed tired. I don’t buy that rusty thing either. I know they are going to take huge flak from thier press etc. I expect a huge improvement next week. England had a plan, stuck to thier guns. If they had that scrumhalf [ who’s name eludes me now…Kerr?] they would have won, just 1 moment of magic somewhere and it was over. Can’t wait to see what my “Bok” side are going to do the next few weeks against “Wales” and “Scotland”…….Aussies look very good against the French.

    1. I imagine it’s Danny Care? And yeah I was disappointed in Youngs, obviously his error before the Yarde yellow was horrible.

    2. Not sure the Aussies were that good, or if most of the time, the French were just that bad!!

  10. Dick Lishman

    It’s Kerr-Barlow, but why would he play for England? Unless I’ve misread you.

    The All Blacks didn’t lack passion, or seem tired @ Ellis Pk not so long ago tho did they?

  11. I gave an 8. For such a weakened side to finish within a score of the world champs at a venue they haven’t been beaten at in two decades takes a monumental effort. We led for most of it and the set piece effort was immaculate. If I recall correctly, we didn’t lose a single scrum or lineout on our own ball. Half backs also found some surprising form, midfield gelled reasonably and May looked sharp all game.

    Had our handling been better (or Owens was more consistent) we could have nicked it.

  12. England XV for the Second Test:


    Sinckler/ Waller

  13. How did people find the TV commentary? I haven’t watched a lot of rugby on Sky recently but Barnes and his mate blathered on incessantly about nothing in particular (Eg “England really want to win”, or personal highlight was “Launchbury.. who’d never even been to NZ before this”), and failed to provide any insight or analysis (Eg, the scrum when Eng were starting to dominate). I can take one but not both!

    1. Apart from Greenwood and Dowie, Sky’s coverage and punditry is well below what BT has bought to the game.

      For me we have a big problem with Tuilagi – as someone else said he makes breaks, but they often end because he doesn’t off load enough. Does he have the pace to play on the wing? Not sure.

      For me I would start Eastmond and Burrell, bring Tuilagi on later

      Care was really missed today.

      Thought Morgan was immense and personally would stick with him

      1. Sure, Tuilagi often makes breaks but doesn’t get the offloads away.

        However, he makes inroads into the defence that ONLY he can make. Even if he doesn’t get the ball away, he’ll make 20-30yds over the gainline.

  14. I loved that short ball from Eastmond to Tuilagi was beautiful to watch the NZ midfield look like noobs for the first time in years! I am starting to wonder like a couple of other people on here as to whether Tuilagi could make it on the wing. I was thinking about his positioning but one of everyones major complaints is his positioning anyway haha. But I thought we looked dangerous today and would be loath to drop manu or Eastmond, but the way Burrell is playing atm he has to be in the team, very glad im not Lancaster.

  15. Small margins, a Danny Care training accident away from a famous win. Such a shame we weren’t able to capitalise on a beatable performance from the ABs. Still we were 15-20 points better than I expected today so can’t not a loss I’m too unhappy with.

    No idea who to pick next week, maybe the cavalry will take more of the bench spots and we won’t see wholesale changes. It’s not like today’s guys are undeserving of another crack.

  16. I draw 2 conclusions (1)SL and his coaching team are definitely up there with the best in the world (2)England are strong contenders to win the World Cup.We can only get better and stronger in next 15 months

    1. I’ve been sceptical of SL but have to admit Wales 2012 aside they have been competitive in every match, which considering the lack for caps is pretty impressive. Still need to convert more of these close losses into wins though.

    2. It’s also impressive that some players seems to play better for England than they have for their clubs. Farrell, Burns and Morgan being notable in that respect.

      1. It’s no coincidence that Burns and Morgan are both at Gloucester who have been terrible all season.

        Farrell’s been pretty decent for Sarries IMHO.

  17. I wonder how many changes we’ll see next week? Care obviously has to be there but every other possible change gives me a headache.
    Morgan, Parling, Haskell and Eastmond were all very impressive.

    Also, does anybody know who the man of the match was? I dejectedly turned off the stream before it was mentioned but from first glance I felt Robshaw deserved it.

    1. Lawes and Wood have to start next week, they really bring something extra. I’m not so sure about Vunipola over Morgan as the latter really did have a good game. As for the centres, I have absolutely no idea. If 12trees is fit, will he be in for his kicking game? I hope Eastmond makes the bench at least.
      MoM – no idea about the official one, but probably a NZ player as they did win after all.

    2. But when you look at who they’ll be replaced with!!
      Vunipola in for Morgan. May have finished with two losses in two finals, but was still part of a team that made it to those finals, and he will take the ball up more frequently than Morgan, and drag in more defenders. Also offloads better.
      Lawes in for Parling. Just helped his club win the double, and will scare the half backs to death when he’s running at them ready to launch. Also ran the line out very well in Parling’s 6N absence.
      Wood in for Haskell. Just captained his side to the double, and will be brimming with confidence. Also gives an extra line out option, which I don’t think Haskell does as well.
      Also possibles are Farrell for Burns, Burrell in somewhere I hope, and Ashton for May?

  18. Exciting game to watch, with some good play from both sides but you could tell both were a bit rusty with far too many handling errors.

    For England I was pretty pleased with the set piece, rolling mauls seemed the most effective Englands have been in a long time. May ad his best international game (one awful decision in his 22 apart). The fly-halfs looked solid, Tuilagi and Eastmond partnership went well though i’d like to see more offloads from the former. Morgan as usual played nothing like he does for Gloucester.

    However, other than Morgan we had no go forward ball in the forwards and so were constantly getting tackled behind the gainline and unable to draw in NZ defenders. Occasionally we were caught defending too narrow and once again the defending restarts were a shambles. This has to be focused on in training.

    The All Blacks will be better next game so we also must improve.

    On other notes, Nigel Owens once again shows the inconsistencies that regularly appear in his game, and those 2 knock on calls were shocking. Also who else was a little embarrassed by the fans booing the English kicker every time?

  19. Really short ref moan. Those two knock on calls?! What the hell?!
    I could see the discrepancy between the cards, I’m not sure Jonny may ever makes it to ground but then it shouldn’t have been a penalty at all.

  20. Good game to watch, expect NZ to be better next week tho. Big calls for SL for next week as I thought a few people really put their hands up.

    Haskell and Morgan were excellent and Eastmond deserves a run in the side I think, he does have a kicking game and his speed and distribution make him a better option than 36 for me.

  21. Rob Webber showed a lot of potential, give him more experience in the international stage and i hope he overtakes Tom Youngs.

    Kyle Eastmond did not disappoint and his partnership with Manu clicked well.

    Ben Youngs very poor game allowed turn overs to happen, could be his last game for the test.

    Freddie Burns played very well & defend well. With a better scrum half could do some seriously damage to the all blacks.

    Marland Yarde very unlucky with his yellow but defended well and tackled well, still needs more international game time.
    Jonny May played a bit better but needs to communicate with Mike Brown.

  22. Sounds like we are going to see manu on the wing, the media always knows and its the top article on BBC rugby union. backline of care, farrell, tuilagi, eastmond, burrell, yarde brown? who have thought!?

  23. Really hope SL doesn’t put Tuilagi on the wing. Needs to be at 13. He breaks the gain line with every single carry, and pulls in 2 or 3 defenders every time. Would like to see him offload more, but once or twice I did notice him looking for it but no-one seemed to be on his shoulder.

    Would bring back Twelvetrees and put Eastmond in the 23 shirt. Also thought Youngs was quietly really effective until his blunder. His kicking game was really important to the game. Obviously he had a nightmare pulling the ball out of that ruck, but it happens when you are digging a ball out like that.

    For 2nd Test:

    1. Marler 2. Hartley 3. Wilson 4. Lawes 5. Launchbury 6. Wood 7. Robshaw 8. Morgan 9. Care 10. Farrell 11. May 12. Twelvetrees 13. Tuilagi 14. Yarde 15. Brown

    16. Webber 17. Mullan 18. Thomas 19. Parling 20. Vunipola 21. Youngs 22. Burns 23. Eastmond

    1. I have to agree with pretty much all of this. Tuilagi on the wing is an interesting idea and it seems Lancaster really wants to try it before the world cup, but I don’t think this is the game to try. It is must win game and although it’s tempting to squeeze Burrell in there somewhere, unfortunately someone has to miss out and I really hope Eastmond is in the 23.
      My only change would be Attwood on the bench instead of Parling. Yes it’s tough on Parling but I think Attwood is better suited to the impact role, and especially packing down behind Thomas. Also, I think it will be close between Webber and Hartley but definitely agree with Morgan starting over Vunipola.

      1. Tough on Attwood but Parling is just the better player for me. Hartley and Webber is dependent on how fit Hartley is. If he is fully fit, he plays. Might make sense to let Webber start and give Hartley the last half an hour when his leadership could be key.

        That selection is harsh on Burrell, but more so Haskell. Thought he was excellent on Saturday, but I just can’t find a way of fitting him in the squad!

        1. Please no 12Ts. He may be a second playmaker, but only plays by the numbers – little spark or touch of genius. I also still think he has a somewhat suspect defence.

          Can he use speed and agility to break the line like Eastmond?
          Does he run brilliant lines like Burrell?
          Does his sheer power cause Conrad Smith to wake up in the night sweating?

          The answer is of course no. And therefore he shouldn’t be considered.

          Whilst I love the idea of shoehorning Tuilagi, Eastmond and Burrell into the side, I think putting Tuilagi on the wing would be a step too far.

          I’d like to see Burrell and Tuilagi, with Eastmond on the bench.

          (Also think May’s pace caused the ABs a few worrying moments and I’d like to see him get a another crack)

          1. I do see what you mean about Twelvetrees, and I wouldn’t be upset to see Burrell and Tuilagi with Eastmond on the bench.

            But, I do think Twelvetrees brings a really strong balance to the midfield, His ticking game is really important, and his distribution is better than any of the other centres. He does lack the game changing ability though.

            Personally, I would have the selection I went with above, but I can understand the arguments against Twelvetrees.

    2. I’m in disagreement with you about Tuilagi. Yes he breaks the gain line, but he really doesn’t bring others in, and on current form I really don’t see how you can leave Burrell out. He runs brilliant lines, gets on people’s shoulders in support, and 9 times out of 10 gets the offload away. With a playmaker at 12, he becomes a very, very effective 13 in my opinion. Tuilagi as an impact sub or on the wing, because you know he will still come looking for work wherever he is placed on the field.

      1. I think you undervalue how much space Tuilagi creates by drawing in 2 or 3 defenders on every single carry. It’s vital to getting good go forward ball. A lotof Englands good play at the weekend come from space created from a strong Tuilagi carry. Quick ball of the back of that with a defender or two missing in defense creates breaks and gets England over the gainline. Burrell just does not draw players the way he does – in fact, there are not many players in world rugby that do.

        Tuilagi on the wing I’m unsure about. His kicking is not great, and I can just see Cruden kicking the ball in behind him and turning him all afternoon. Could be awesome – or could be a nightmare.

        1. Agree with Jacob about tuilagi at 13 – also don’t think you can blame him if the support isn’t there to take advantage of his breaks!

  24. It is not much commented on thus far, but I have to say that I thought Jonny May had a good game.

    I would go as far as to say that Brown (who seemed to get some mixed reviews in the Sunday papers) apart, May was the best back 3 player on either side.

    Centre is a very interesting position isn’t?

    Eastmond and Tuilagi looked very good together, and I wouldn’t be disappointed to see them play again. In fact, I think we will, with Burrell on the bench.

    If it was my choice I would start Burrell with Eastmond on the bench but I am not sure that Lancaster sees Burrell as a 12 in this team.

    I understand the logic behind playing Tuilagi on the wing, but its not the right call for me.

  25. Sounds like Twelvetrees will be fit, so the press are talking about the 6N midfield – Farrell, Eastmond, Yarde.

    This game was definitely another nail in Barritt and Goode’s international coffins. Eastmond *must* at least be the bench option along with Burns or Cipriani now.

    1. I meant, Farrell, 36, Burrell. I dunno what I was typing. Bloody multitasking. Bloody toddlers!

  26. I enjoyed the match,

    England played well but lets not get carried away, this was not NZ’s A-game, they were dreadful.

    Set piece was excellent.
    Defence rushed well, although left a lot of holes on the outside. If AB had passes better we would have had problems.
    Manu carried well
    Burns defended and kicked well, all round good game.
    Breakdown was excellent
    Forwards carried well.

    Wingers still do not get the ball often enough.
    Too many forwards at first receiver.
    Youngs was shocking, licked long and slow delivery of the ball slowed all the moves down.
    Passing is a bit pedestrian.
    Apart from Manu on the crash nobody really threatens the gainline in the midfield, however I believe this is due to slow ball from the 9.

    All in All
    lots of good and lots to build on. Vunipola, Woods, Laws and Hartley should give the pack more dynamism and bite, so lots to look forward to there. Care or Dickson could speed up the ball no end, preferably Care.

    I wouldn’t judge the wingers until I see the getting could quality ball to work with more regularly. 12t’s has more passing options and could help there. Although Farrell is number one and Burns played really well. I would like to see Cipp get a full game. Ok defensive liability, I agree. However he showed when he came on, very briefly, that he has is cool under pressure. I agree he was not tested that much but he did what he did with assurance. He also showed that he can take the ball to the line better than burns or Farrell. But most importantly he can pass. He regularly throws the ball 30 yards for Sale and with speed. I would like to see Burrell and Manu in the centres but to drop 12t’s we need a real footballer at 10. This is an experiment worth trying.

    my team

    Care/ Dickson (Depending on fitness)

  27. I’d go
    1) Marler
    2) Hartley
    3) Wilson
    4) Launch
    5) Lawes
    6) Wood
    7) Robshaw
    8) Vunipola (I like Morgan’s extra pace from the bench, Vuni to do the softening up)
    9) Care
    10) Farrell
    11) May/Yarde (can’t decide)
    12) Burrell (I want to see Manu getting on the end of his offloads with gain line already breached)
    13) Tuilagi (We need to get better at predicting he’s going to get over the gain line and get numbers there to produce quick ball, Care will help here as well)
    14) Ashton
    15) Brown

    16) Wilson
    17) Mullan or Waller
    18) Thomas (but still not convinced, prefer Sinckler but we’ve got a lot of changes already)
    19) Attwood this is so harsh on Parling, but Lawes goes the full 80 (or more in the final!) and we need grunt to stick behind Thomas. I don’t see the point of using Lawes as a bench option as his best attribute is his incredible engine. However I was also adamant that Attwood should have started over Parling on Sat, my toys will stay in the pram if it is Parling that gets the nod.
    20) Morgan (very tough on Haskell)
    21) Youngs
    22) Burns
    23) Eastmond

  28. I like your team Matt. It is harsh on Parling who played really well – but as you say we need the bulk behind Thomas and Attwood looked pretty good when he got on.

    I do feel sorry for Haskell, he played so well, but just cannot see how to fit him in

    1. The good thing about Haskell is he’s in the ‘Woodshaw’ mould so he can fill in for either of them without altering the balance of the back row. Wood is under some pressure from him though, but his lineout work keeps him ahead for me.

  29. The whole Manu on the wing thing. I’m not completley sold, but if he did play on the wing, SL could counter his kicking limitations by picking FOden on the other, 2 fullbacks covering the NZ kicks with Farrell able to drop back to assist, as most 10s do anyway.

    Think about the positivies for a second. Eng are just not scoring through the wingers. Most of our tries come up the middle. So could having 3 centres, no wings and 2 fullbacks work? Could be a take on the 1966 world cup winning football team – who were also known as the wingless wonders!

  30. Charlie blah

    Could be a bit more thoughtful with the ‘Empire’ stuff Charlie Brown. Try Niall Ferguson’s ‘Empire’. It exported slavery, massacre & genocide. Sound familiar?

    Besides the Gr8 bit was a long time ago & as Putin said; ‘England is a small country who no one listens to any more’.

    1. Quite agree. I know irony doesn’t translate well in print but I thought I’d done enough to carry it off.

  31. Chuckles

    Surely Yarde has to take responsibility, as we all do for our actions. I mean, he made it sooooooo obvious he begged Owens to card him, which duly happened.

    Couldn’t say he cost England the game tho as NZ went blind, opposite side from Yarde’s wing.

    1. I don’t blame Yarde, I don’t think he had much choice really. If anything I blame Youngs for the utterly unforced error that got Yarde into that position in the first place.

  32. RonBraz

    Youngs dropped 1 real clanger which cost England, but the backs had plenty ball. See match stats.

    When I’d prev said ‘E’s midfield went E 2 W I was castigated & 1 said it didn’t matter so long as they scored!

    IMO England ran better & STRAIGHTER, but agree with you in that the centres must create room for the wide men or it’s g’nite nurse. And they once again DIDN’T score.

    Mind you neither did the ABs til the death… but they did when they took the game by the scruff & backed themselves. In the end it was the diff.

    Moral of story. You’ve gotta score tries. They’re worth more pts. And incl thru the backs!

  33. Sam

    Well Owens was talked up as the ‘best in the world’ (S Times) & he is NH! The pen count was 7 – 6 in NZ’s favour in the end (I think). And it has gone agin them in the past, but if the 07 WC is mentioned it’s called whingeing!

    Works both ways I guess & teams unfortunately have to overcome some duff ref calls from time to time. If it’s taken out of the whistle blowers hands, it helps.

    Anyway, another shot nxt Sat. Maybe a SH ref might help? Sorry.

    1. When people discuss the difference between having a NH or SH ref, it is normally in the context of interpretation of the breakdown, not incorrect knock-on calls and inconsistencies with issuing yellow cards.

    2. When people discuss the difference between having a NH or SH ref, it is normally in the context of interpretation of the breakdown, not incorrect knock-on calls and inconsistencies with issuing yellow cards.

  34. Matt

    Is this the team whom you think SL WILL actually go for (as well as it being yr pick)?

    I think your team is likely to take the field… with prob Yarde & May to start again.

  35. Simon Scantlebury

    Isn’t that what the Irish said on their last tour?

    Time will tell, but surely England ought to have won the 6N 1st before yr talk of ‘world class’ stuff. They haven’t moved in the ranking for yrs & certainly not under SL (apart for a few wks due to Oz having temp lost pts in the RC last yr).

    Do you base yr opinion on the back of 1 swallow making a summer? Might you have been wiser to have waited til after nxt Sat before offering up this same old same old?

    1. England only had 2 chances to climb the rankings last year, against Australia (which we won) and New Zealand (which we lost, of course). You can’t climb them by beating teams lower-ranked than yourself. Does mean progress can be quite slow in that respect. A single win in NZ would do our ranking the world of good, such is the ranking difference.

  36. Boo, Dr Boo.

    Yarde was so obvious when he lay in the ruck that he could have been mistaken for a drunk still asleep after a night out on the tiles!

  37. callum

    ‘…fans booing the English kicker every time’? Agree, but listen up @ Twickers nxt time. W wide I’m afraid.

    Works both ways I’m afraid. Ask any NZer regds e.g. 07. Pen count 7 – 6 to NZ… & Owens should have, by law, given Cruden a retake of the conversion when England charged early.

  38. Geat

    1 way is for England to tour the SH yrly.

    I had suggested this on the Samoa ‘rant’ blog, but it didn’t appear.

    They do usually play the SH up hear, so could also arrange top 3 each yr.

    I understood (looked it up once) teams got pts for winning (the amount awarded based on the posi of the opposing team) & lost them for losing. Hence Oz temp went below England for a few wks last yr when they lost to OZ, SA, even tho England hadn’t played at that point. Oz regained them & place due later wins.

  39. Tom

    Could’ve, but (& according to Ian Robertson), England didn’t really threaten the AB line in the 2nd 1/2 . NZ did threaten England’s. It’s an 80 min thing.

Comments are closed.