So, England's World Cup campaign began with a defeat.
And while there were positives - which many experts have been quick to eccentuate - I must admit the whole thing left me a bit flat.
As I said yesterday, it's great that there is no expectation, but if the knock-on is that performances like that will be so roundly praised, then I may have to reassess if that's a good thing or not.
Italy are, of course, no mugs, and - especially in the wake of what happened to Uruguay just before the England game, it's not the end of the world.
But for me, the second half was a bit of a let-down.
With five Liverpool players in the starting line-up, it's clear that Roy Hodgson wants to play like they do.
So the actual make-up of the team baffled me slightly.
Why was Wayne Rooney out on the wing, while Raheem Sterling - a winger - was in the middle?
With Gerrard, Henderson, Sterling and Sturridge all in the team, someone needs to fill the roles that Coutinho and Suarez play in what is probably the most exciting team going forward in the Premier League.
And, of course, he's not quite as good, but surely Rooney should be "playing Suarez", not shoved out on the wing?
But what's done is done in that aspect - what about the performance?
Well, I personally thought a lot of those Liverpool players were not quite the same as they are in the red at Anfield.
Rooney has come in for a lot of flak, and it must be said that he did look disinterested at times, but I think that's just his way of showing frustration - and who can blame him for being frustrated when out of position?
Yet even despite that, he played a big role in England's one real moment of quality, with a brilliant cross which gave Sturridge a tap-in.
Sadly, that and a run straight after Mario Balotelli's strike were just about all Sturridge could muster.
If you're playing as a lone striker, you need to be the focal point, the goal threat. For large swathes, he wasn't.
The much-maligned Danny Welbeck worked hard but created little, while Gerrard - the heartbeat of his club side - did little to get forward and push England on.
The subs didn't do much for me either - Barkley looked bright but there were just too many Italian bodies in his way. At 1-1 he would have made more of an impact than against a side in the lead.
Lallana didn't do much either. The fact he didn't start was a bit of an odd one, but by the looks of things, he's not the impact sub you need. Simple thing - he either starts, or doesn't feature at all.
And Wilshere was comfortably the worst of the subs, gave the ball away too much and failed to impose himself.
With Rickie Lambert on the bench and plenty of balls coming into the middle, it is a touch curious that those were the chosen three.
England may well have enough to beat Uruguay and Costa Rica on the opening game showings, but they will need to be more ruthless in front of goal, that's for sure.
As a spectator experience, I much more enjoyed the Costa Rica v Uruguay game just beforehand.
Costa Rica, led by Arsenal's Joel Campbell, were superb in the second half, fighting back to win 3-1.
As well as having a man sent off late on, the Uruguayans were also unable to call upon Luis Suarez.
If their talisman wasn't fit enough to come on when they were losing against Costa Rica, then I can't see how he'll be fit enough to start on Thursday night.
Elsewhere, Group C began with gusto and Colombia and Ivory Coast set the early pace, Colombia despatching Greece 3-0 and the Ivorians coming from a goal down to beat Japan.
And whatever happens to England down the line, three full days in (and 18 minutes of Switzerland v Ecuador), this has been a hell of a World Cup so far.These are the views of one man, not the Essex Chronicle as a whole...
↧