England were not the only 'established' team to struggle. Ireland were desperate against Namibia, Scotland were troubled by Portugal, Wales were given a scare by Canada and France actually lost to Argentina.
The nature of these smaller nations is that they don't have the depth to sustain a programme of four games inside three weeks. It was nice while it lasted and has given the competition the perfect kick off but that's it now.
These opening fixtures were the minnows' cup finals and were always going to be when the group favourites were at their most vulnerable.
Does anyone really see Namibia producing the same against both Argentina and France?
Portugal will still be annihilated by the All Blacks and Italy and Canada won't inflict much pain on Australia.
With regards England Ollie Barkley had a good game and was clearly their best player but let's not go too overboard about him.
The fly half simply performed as the rest of his team should have done, with composure and an ability to go off script at the right times.
That does not mean he should be an automatic selection to play South Africa. England have been preparing to face the Springboks since January 1 when Brian Ashton took over.
They have done that expecting Jonny Wilkinson to be fit - rash I know but true nonetheless - and there is every chance that will be the case.
Does the evidence of one game against weak opposition mean Ashton should rip up his plans and pick Barkley instead of a fit Wilkinson? In my opinion, no.