The England World Cup Thread

[LondonTiger]

First topic message reminder :

Fixtures

ENGLAND 35 FIJI 11



ENGLAND v WALES at Twickenham Stadium, London
Saturday 26th September 2015 – Kick Off: 8:00pm
Referee: Jérôme Garcès (FFR)

ENGLAND v AUSTRALIA at Twickenham Stadium, London
Saturday 3rd October 2015 – Kick Off: 8:00pm
Referee: Romain Poite (FFR)

ENGLAND v URUGUAY at Manchester City Stadium, Manchester
Saturday 10th October 2015 – Kick Off: 8:00pm
Referee: Chris Pollock (NZR)



Other Pool A Fixtures

Sun 20th September 2:30pm Wales v Uruguay Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
Wed 23rd September 4:45pm Australia v Fiji Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
Sun 27th September 12:00pm Australia v Uruguay Villa Park, Birmingham
Thu 1st October 4:45pm Wales v Fiji Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
Tue 6th October 8:00pm Fiji v Uruguay Stadium MK, Milton Keynes
Sat 10th October 4:45pm Australia v Wales Twickenham Stadium, London



Table

England P1; W1; L0; D0; PF35; PA11; Points 5
Australia P0; W0; L0; D0; PF0; PA0; Points 0
Uruguay P0; W0; L0; D0; PF0; PA0; Points 0
Wales P0; W0; L0; D0; PF0; PA0; Points 0
Fiji P1; W0; L1; D0; PF11; PA35; Points 0


Team for next Match

TBC

[beshocked]

no 7 & 1/2 I guess it differs on the player.

Some players have great seasons, some will never answer their critics.

If we are looking at the current England squad, the following I would say are sufficiently proven at international level:

LH: Marler,Mako
HK:T.Youngs
TH:Cole,Wilson
Lock:Launchbury,Lawes,Parling
Flanker:Robshaw,Wood,Haskell
8: Morgan,Billy
9:Youngs,Care,Wigglesworth
10.Farrell
Wings: None - all still too inexperienced
12: Barritt
13: None
15: Brown,Goode

I expect others will get themselves on the list in the future but they have less caps than these guys.

Webber has less caps and starts than all these guys.

Less starts than most of the other guys in the squad too.

[No 7&1/2]

Good answer. i agree in part bar I think all the wingers have shown they have enough quality to play internationally, if not shown how succesful they will be. 10, I think we can say Ford is here to stay.

I suppose in answer to that it's what you're looking for or how you define proven at international level though. What do George or Webber need to do for you?

[beshocked]

no 7 & 1/2 I guess they need to perform in the biggest games. Starting would help too.

Webber has more caps than George but he's never really been able down a spot in the 23 has he? As for George perhaps he'll need one of the current hookers to be injured for him to get an opportunity though even then I expect Lancaster would parachute Hartley in.

My list of "proven" players shows that there are still gaps that need to be filled.

I haven't put the likes of Ford and the wingers because I think their cap amounts are a little low at the moment - after this RWC if they stay match fit and have good tournaments then they'll fit the bill.

I agree Ford is likely here to stay but he has to maintain good form.

[No 7&1/2]

Webber hasn't nailed the 23 but that's more to do with hartley and Youngs being better. As we've all discussed before England have a lot of depth so not being able to nail down a place in the squad or extended squad for us doesn't necessarily demonstrate someone isn't good enough. Your first point there on 'they need to perform in the biggest games'. Perform as in don't look out of play or perform as in they are really good?

And that last point I get but as before I think all the wings are proved now to be good enough for consideration but yes if they are playing poorly for a length of time should be dropped.

[Wi11]

no 7 & 1/2 I guess it differs on the player.

Some players have great seasons, some will never answer their critics.

If we are looking at the current England squad, the following I would say are sufficiently proven at international level:

LH: Marler,Mako
HK:T.Youngs
TH:Cole,Wilson
Lock:Launchbury,Lawes,Parling
Flanker:Robshaw,Wood,Haskell
8: Morgan,Billy
9:Youngs,Care,Wigglesworth
10.Farrell
Wings: None - all still too inexperienced
12: Barritt
13: None
15: Brown,Goode

I expect others will get themselves on the list in the future but they have less caps than these guys.

Webber has less caps and starts than all these guys.

Less starts than most of the other guys in the squad too.

It seems to me like you are treating "proven" as "played lots of games". I don't think Tom Youngs or James Haskell have proven any more than Ford or Watson.

[beshocked]

no 7 &1/2 I should add that I don't think Webber is rubbish either. I just think there are better options. Hartley and T.Youngs are clearly deemed better than Webber by Lancaster.

As for George I personally believe he deserves to be given opportunities because I feel that with opportunities he wouldn't just challenge to be the 3rd choice hooker, I think he can challenge for 1st choice.

Contrary to your opinion, Webber is not a particularly experienced hooker,  it is likely he has less international minutes than Ford for example and I wouldn't call Ford that experienced yet.

When I am talking about experience I am talking about starting in the biggest games.

Bit of both. They need to do enough to keep a spot in the squad.

I am not sure about that. The biggest scrutiny of the wingers will be Fiji,Wales and Australia IMO.

wi11 whether you like Haskell or Youngs they have floated around the squad quite a while now.

Haskell has 60 caps. Not sure you can say he's unproven. Sometimes he doesn't perform as we want him to but he's shown the capability to put in  very good performances. E.g. his MOM performance vs Wales.

Tom Youngs equally has his own strengths and weaknesses but he's been one of the best hookers in England (perhaps that's not saying much but he has).

Ford and Watson still has question marks over parts of their game. I guess so do Youngs and Haskell but they have more experience and caps than the other two guys. I would say they are more proven.

[No 7&1/2]

Fair enough, it goes down to when George gets a chance he needs to grab. During the warm ups i don't feel he did that. Again I've never said Webber has mountains of experience i've said in his other games he's not looked out of place. I agree with your summary of George.

I think the wings have shown in previous they are good enough but they do have to perform or Nowell will grab his spot back and there's Wade, Roko etc waiting for a chance.

[No 7&1/2]

I still think overall there's a bit of balance getting people some exposure. Sometimes it's nice to give them a Fiji, but also throw them in at the deep end if you think they're good enough. For what it's worth I don't think Webber or George really matters for Fiji so there's a good argument to build up Geroge's experience even from the bench. There's currently more of a question mark against George than Webber though so in a WC where he will be out on his ear if they go out early (probably) you can understand. Given Burgess in there though may just be they don't rate George.

[beshocked]

no 7 & 1/2 you believe that George has looked out of place?

Pretty sure the common consensus is that George did well in the warm ups.

It's not as if Webber has been tearing up trees. The best you can say is that he's been solid in the warm up.

Of course there needs to be a bit of balance on people getting some exposure and so far Lancaster has done a pretty shoddy job in that area. I've made that clear a few times.

You don't think there is a question mark next to Webber's name? Especially after a poor season for Bath?

It just seems strange that the only risk Lancaster has made is the most controversial - Burgess.

As for Slade and George - I think you'll find most England fans wanted them in the 23.

[No 7&1/2]

No I don't feel that George has looked out of place hence why I said Webber or George no big deal but there is more of a question mark against George at this level compared to Webber.

Think I called for Slade to be trialled at 12 a while back and was told he lacked experience so hey ho.

Again where possible Lancaster has tried to make a selection decision and stick with it to build experience in a squad which lacks experience.

[LondonTiger]

There was virtually no chance of George making the squad for Fiji.

The England coaches have demonstrated time and again that they value familiarity and loyalty over short term form. (And we all know the quote about form and class). Last summer George was, at best, 7th in the coaches pecking order (5 hookers were taken to New Zealand and Tom Youngs was unavailable nursing his wife). At the end of the 2015 season George had overtaken the Quins boys who went to NZ, but was still 5th choice. Hartley dropped out and he overtook LCD during the summer and warm ups.

He did all right when he came on against France, but no better than Webber did a week earlier. Thus it was always unlikely he had done enough to seize the shirt.

This ethos Lancaster has can be challenged and he does appear to take it too far - however it also builds a team that is better than the sum of it's parts.

[emack2]

Is Twickenham equipped with a Roof?going by weather here they`ll need a snorkel
and flippers.

[LondonTiger]

Is Twickenham equipped with a Roof?going by weather here they`ll need a snorkel
and flippers.

As rugby is an outdoor sport - why would it have a roof?

[beshocked]

There was virtually no chance of George making the squad for Fiji.

The England coaches have demonstrated time and again that they value familiarity and loyalty over short term form. (And we all know the quote about form and class). Last summer George was, at best, 7th in the coaches pecking order (5 hookers were taken to New Zealand and Tom Youngs was unavailable nursing his wife). At the end of the 2015 season George had overtaken the Quins boys who went to NZ, but was still 5th choice. Hartley dropped out and he overtook LCD during the summer and warm ups.

He did all right when he came on against France, but no better than Webber did a week earlier. Thus it was always unlikely he had done enough to seize the shirt.

This ethos Lancaster has can be challenged and he does appear to take it too far - however it also builds a team that is better than the sum of it's parts.

Speak for yourself Londontiger. I thought it was obvious that Lancaster needed to pick George in the 23.

What has last year got to do this year anyhow? If we were basing the team on last year

Care-Farrell would be the half back combo, Burrell would be 13 etc.

Your whole argument falls apart because of Burgess..... Lancaster has championed Burgess time and again. That has nothing to do with familiarity and loyalty.

You talk about form and class - sadly Webber has neither..... If he did you and no 7 & 1/2 might have valid points but he doesn't.

He's not been starting in big games so how can you say he's got proven class?

Where's the evidence?

[No 7&1/2]

So it's not valid to say Webber played as good as if not slightly better in his warm up game?

[beshocked]

You're entitled to your opinion no 7 & 1/2 but IMO many people believe George played very well in the warm ups and should be in the 23 instead of Webber. Even some wanted George to start instead of Youngs. So it's not just me.

Equally I am sure there are many who believe that Slade and Nowell should be in the 23 instead of Farrell and Burgess too.

[LondonTiger]

Jeez, I try and explain what the coaches are thinking and get hauled over the coals as if it is my view.

Frankly anyone who thought the coaches were going to choose George is living in cloud cuckoo land. I would have done based purely on my own limited knowledge of the players, but I am not the coach.

[beshocked]

Londontiger if that's the logic of the coaches then to be frank they should be sacked as they've obviously completely ignored their own so called ethos.

Picking Burgess goes completely against the view you just suggested.

Cloud cuckoo land? Perhaps I am living there. It must be quite busy.

I guess you're right though. It would be difficult to imagine Lancaster making sensible bench selections!

Silly me to think that Lancaster might have seen the light!

[BamBam]

Beshocked, would you care if he didn't play for Sarries?

[LondonTiger]

If the incumbent performs really poorly for a number of games they are dropped. Otherwise people have to be performing clearly better to move up the pecking order.

Thus George moved ahead of a handful of hookers in a 12 month window, but in they eyes of the coaches not all of them. They may be wrong, but unlike us they see them in training.

Farrell was only left out after stinking the shop up in the AIs, followed by Ford playing really well.

As far as Burgess goes to a large degree he fits the bomber selection template - the contenders performed poorly, while he is deemed to have an exceptional talent. He has been with the England squad for the whole of 2015 - so is familiar with the ways of working etc.


It is easy for us keyboard selectors, as our selections are never challenged on the pitch. Personally my bench for this game would have been Care, Slade (or Goode) and Nowell in the backs. So completely different. I woudl also have selected George. But I am open minded enough to understand the coaches decisions. I may disagree with the coaches - but I also accept they have more info than me.

[beshocked]

Yes Bambam. I want Slade to play instead of Farrell, Nowell instead of Burgess so it's not just a Saracens player I feel is being hard done by. Against Fiji I would also prefer to see Care instead of Wigglesworth

I want the best players to play for England.

The problem is you think I am championing George because he's a Saracens player - no it's not that. I think he was one of the best performing hookers in England last season and think he's done very well in the warm ups. I genuinely think George is better than Webber.

If Webber had a barnstorming season, had a proven track record at international level and was outstanding in the warm ups then I would have no case for argument.

On the contrary I have a strong argument.

You don't see me fighting for any other Saracen to start in the line up do you?

[BamBam]

Ok, well just to change it up, can you argue with someone about Slade or Nowell instead, just to help me waste a bit more time at work this afternoon

[beshocked]

Londontiger see I think that bench selection of yours is very logical and much more logical than Lancaster's. I think the general consensus on here is that bench you suggested.

You talk about being open minded - I genuinely can't understand picking Webber,Wigglesworth and Farrell. If these 3 players are deemed better at the structural game then why on earth aren't they starting?

Surely the main usage of a bench is as impact?

Just because Lancaster picks a certain bench doesn't mean we should agree and it to be frank it doesn't mean the coaches get it right all the time. They are human.

It's easy to say they are the professionals and we are the keyboard warriors but they are not always right. I guess you could argue neither are we but there's a lot of knowledge on here even if some of it is based on bias.

As for Farrell Jr I personally thought it was a mistake to pick him in the AIs at all as every man and their dog could see he was struggling for form and fitness. Didn't need to be an international coach to see that.

Surely the biggest kick in the teeth for the selection of Burgess was to 36,Eastmond and Burrell. Sure they weren't the best centres in the world but surely in their case loyalty should have counted for something.

Oh and training isn't everything of course.

[beshocked]

Ok, well just to change it up, can you argue with someone about Slade or Nowell instead, just to help me waste a bit more time at work this afternoon

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not but Okay fine. There needs to be someone to oppose me then.

No 7 & 1/2 championed Webber, will you champion Farrell and Burgess?

[LondonTiger]

Farrell should be on the bench because if the game is tight we need his goal kicking. He is a guarantee to feature against Wales and Australia - so needs some game time. Salde and goode are untested as international goal-kickers, and indeed as international 10s, so if ford is to break under intense physical challenges form a massive Fjian back line we really need Farrell to come on. Farrell is a proven international, a British Lion and approaching his best form.

[No 7&1/2]

I just said its pretty understandable and wont really make a difference with George slightly more risky. I ll champion Farrell as I think hes clearly the obvious choive for the bench.

[LondonTiger]

BTW - lots of people talking about wanting an impact bench. however you also have to consider what happens if a started is crocked in the first minute.

[BamBam]

You could just not argue and talk about the opposition or something!! Don't worry beshocked, after the Fiji game you'll have a great time with the Welsh fans

[beshocked]

Londontiger good argument, you make some excellent points. You're right there certainly is a good case to picking Farrell I just feel that because he is proven there is no need to given him more gametime.

Slade on the other hand if given gametime will be a much more versatile bench option than Farrell. Slade needs an opportunity IMO to prove himself, his debut in the warm up was good so want to see more from him.

Realistically the game against Fiji shouldn't be tight, IMO England need to be positive. Farrell though a physical player is not the best impact player IMO. He showed his weakness in attack with his butchered overlap against Ireland. Can afford to do it in a warm up but not against Fiji or any other team.

Slade is more attacking than Farrell, that's clear to me even as a Saracens fan. Slade looked comfortable in his debut, bringing him off the bench would be another step in experience for him.

[No 7&1/2]

Slade wont prove anything coming of the bench against Fiji though as we ve established!

[englandglory4ever]

Surely all this talk of mixing up the side is fanciful? Hasn't Lancaster picked what he thinks is his best side and barring form or injury will pick this side for just about every match? The RWC is such an important tournament he would be stupid to experiment and be accused of experimenting or not knowing his starting XV, if he lost a match. I expect to see this side for every game now. If not he will be playing a very dangerous game.

[LondonTiger]

I can see that some will choose to be offended, but I did have a wry grin watching the hakarena

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlHS_Mn7nWE


Reckon we shoudl all do it before kick off on Friday. whether we are at the game, in a pub, in afanzone or at home.

[Poorfour]

Let's be realistic about this. Lancaster has said in so many words that he sees the Fiji, Wales and Australia games as games that require his strongest squad on the pitch and the bench.

Possibly that is being overcautious about Fiji, but since they are a much improved team this season, the preferred squad are short of game time anyway and it would be a disaster for England to lose their opening game, it seems pretty reasonable to me to take them seriously.

The XXIII picked for this game are what Lancaster considers his strongest side. There are a further handful of players who are close enough to this group that they might swap in as a result of training performances or for specific opposition, such as Wilson, Care, Haskell, and Goode.

Everyone else in the squad is there to provide three things: injury cover, opposition in practice and, if things are going well, squad rotation against Uruguay. Being in the squad is no guarantee they will play, and being in the squad shouldn't create an expectation that they will play. Any talk of giving George or Slade game time for the sake of their experience is just so much horse manure.

In this pool, every game is a potential knockout game. Even failing to put enough points past Uruguay could make a difference if England lose one of the early games. We should expect the coaches to pick a squad to win every game.

We can all disagree about some of the picks. Personally, I think Care is a better bench option than Wigglesworth, in part because England are more likely to need a game-changer than a closer - but the squad seems to skewed towards closing the game out, hence reliability over potential. I would like Slade to play at some point. I thought George might have done enough in the warm ups to be worth a bench spot.

But these are marginal calls about players who are, ultimately, fringe members of the squad, and about whom the coaches know much more than we do.

[Gwlad]

I can see that some will choose to be offended, but I did have a wry grin watching the hakarena

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlHS_Mn7nWE


Reckon we shoudl all do it before kick off on Friday. whether we are at the game, in a pub, in  afanzone or at home.

Dawson seems to have no shame. He and Haskell should set up a double act….. Eric and Ernie, The Two Ronnies, Vic and Bob and now dumb and dumber.

[majesticimperialman]

The Haka is susposed to be a challenge to the apposing team. so why should England not set their own challenge.


Seriously though i expect a lot flak coming Englands way because of this.

[SecretFly]

I can see that some will choose to be offended, but I did have a wry grin watching the hakarena

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlHS_Mn7nWE


Reckon we shoudl all do it before kick off on Friday. whether we are at the game, in a pub, in  afanzone or at home.

Oh I wouldn't be offended by the fun... We've all heard the New Zealander's have a laugh at other people's expense. Who was that big guy in the last world cup that used to do the quick fire briefings/skits on the competing teams? I liked them

Anyway, I don't think any right minded Kiwi would be offended. But............. well, Emlyn Hughes was funny - boyish, a giggler, infectious. Phil Tufnell has a cheeky humour and is another guy that just has that obvious fun loving side to him.

I've never got Dawson though. And he's the wrong character for this set-up too. He just tries too hard. Manu would have been a better choice.

[yappysnap]

Not sure if any one has posted it yet amid the bickering, so here's the Fiji team:

Metuisela Talebula, Waisea Nayacalevu, Niki Goneva, Gabiriele Lovobalavu, Nemani Nadolo, Ben Volavola, Nikola Matawalu; Campese Ma'afu, Sunia Koto, Manasa Saulo, Apisalome Ratuinyarawa, Leone Nakarawa, Dominko Waqaniburotu, Akapusi Qera (captain), Sakiusa Masi Matadigo

Replacements: Peni Ravai, Tuapati Talemaitoga, Isei Colati, Tevita Cavubati, Peceli Yato, Nemia Kenatale, Josh Matavesi, Aseli Tikoirotuma

I've highlighted the big names that I recognise, i think it's probably their strongest team but others may be able to tell me. Either way it looks exciting.

[englandglory4ever]

Well said Poorfour. Agree entirely.

[englandglory4ever]

Just seen the Hakarena. Brilliant.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

Beshocked, you are too club blind, you come across as if you believe that Sarries players are better than any of their rivals. You think George should be the England number one. Everyone is entitled to their op[inions, but you are in a minority of one.

"Webber is not a particularly experienced hooker as I have already explained. He's not as "proven" as you believe he is. 13 caps - 4 as starter, 9 as replacement in 3 years." That is 12 more than George and despite being "rubbish" he has never had a bad appearance for England.

"You say he's not let England down - equally I could say he's not been missed, he's not been very important. It's not like his absence from the England side has been felt." Neither has George who has only this season as a Sarries first choice and then only due to injury

"He's not really had enough caps to be deemed reliable or not." I won't even bother with that one

"It's about destroying myths - the current myth is that Webber is a proven excellent performer at international level. He's not - he's worse than T.Youngs and Hartley. Should be behind George in the pecking order too." Says you, not many others. No one is saying he is Gods Gift, but he is reliable and will do all the basics to an acceptable international standard.


"Webber has less international starts than George Ford!" But a lot more than George

"Webber has more caps than George but he's never really been able down a spot in the 23 has he? As for George perhaps he'll need one of the current hookers to be injured for him to get an opportunity though even then I expect Lancaster would parachute Hartley in." When fit he has been a regular in the squad for the last three years. Yes you are right, Hartley is better than any of the others, common sense.

"Contrary to your opinion, Webber is not a particularly experienced hooker,  it is likely he has less international minutes than Ford for example and I wouldn't call Ford that experienced yet." Contrary to your opinion he is a much more experienced international hooker than George and vastly more experienced in being around the squad and knowing the systems, calls etc.

"When I am talking about experience I am talking about starting in the biggest games." and with half a season of AP rugby behind him George has?

"It's not as if Webber has been tearing up trees. The best you can say is that he's been solid in the warm up." and George has torn down a forest?

"What has last year got to do this year anyhow? If we were basing the team on last year
You talk about form and class - sadly Webber has neither..... If he did you and no 7 & 1/2 might have valid points but he doesn't" Your whole argument is based around last years form, you have constantly knocked Webber on the grounds that last year Batty was better. Two years ago this forum was advocating Webber as the number one ahead of Hartley. Your opinions on class tend to have a tendency to be club orientated.

"You're entitled to your opinion no 7 & 1/2 but IMO many people believe George played very well in the warm ups and should be in the 23 instead of Webber. Even some wanted George to start instead of Youngs. So it's not just me." Name them, most said he had an adequate game, didn't make any howlers, you are the only constant advocate of George, others sympathise but understand why he isn't.

I am worried that we are weakening our scrum to cope with Youngs inability to hit his man in the lineout. Launchbury is bordering world class when fit, Parling is good, but not in Launchbury's class in either the scrum or the loose. If Youngs cannot hit anyone outside of his club mate, then he should not be in the 23 and then George should be in the squad, but probably on the bench.

Youngs loose play is not that much better than either option and his scrummaging and by the look of it, his lineout are well behind. If he cannot hit any of the jumpers when required, he should not be playing, END OF.

[BamBam]

Talebula, Volavola and Nakarawa the only big names you missed yappy

[Geordie]

Read an interesting report on Geoff Parling, saying he had a very strong game v Ireland and could well have been MOM. It suggested he is heads and tails the starting lock..and its between Lawes and Launchbury to play alongside him. With Launchbury not firing in full form Lancaster has gone with Lawes.

It made me wonder...who of the 3 locks would you started with? Would Parling and Launchbury be a better balanced lock combo?

[Poorfour]

We need to remember that Launchbury is just back from injury and doesn't look completely match fit yet. I expect he will come good during the tournament and may then overtake Lawes or Parling as a starter. But he's a bloody good bench option, as things stand.

[Geordie]

Poorfour,

What would your choice be between Parling and Lawes.

[Poorfour]

Poorfour,

What would your choice be between Parling and Lawes.

It depends on the hooker... with Hartley, it would be Lawes. With Youngs, I'd feel safer with Parling.

[Geordie]

Do you think elsewhere their game is similar.
I just think Parlings game is slightly better round the park. Lawes maybe a bit more athletic.

[Poorfour]

Do you think elsewhere their game is similar.  
I just think Parlings game is slightly better round the park.  Lawes maybe a bit more athletic.

Parling's less likely to give away a penalty. Lawes is more likely to scare the opposition backs. Neither is Martin Johnson or Ben Kay.

[LondonTiger]

Read an interesting report on Geoff Parling, saying he had a very strong game v Ireland and could well have been MOM. It suggested he is heads and tails the starting lock..and its between Lawes and Launchbury to play alongside him. With Launchbury not firing in full form Lancaster has gone with Lawes.

It made me wonder...who of the 3 locks would you started with? Would Parling and Launchbury be a better balanced lock combo?

Parling is the kind of player coaches and peers rate higher than fans do.

[Gooseberry]

Read an interesting report on Geoff Parling, saying he had a very strong game v Ireland and could well have been MOM. It suggested he is heads and tails the starting lock..and its between Lawes and Launchbury to play alongside him. With Launchbury not firing in full form Lancaster has gone with Lawes.

It made me wonder...who of the 3 locks would you started with? Would Parling and Launchbury be a better balanced lock combo?

Parling is the kind of player coaches and peers rate higher than fans do.

Thats what happens when you get picked

[greenandpleasantland]

Weather in MK is a bit wet. It's a lovely place to live though.

[Sponsored content]