Scotland’s first win at Twickenham since 1983 was the most complete and authoritative Scottish performance I have seen in my life.
It was as comprehensive a performance as New Zealand could produce.
England were not at the races in their Six Nations opener because Scotland did not let them get to the races.
It was not because England were dropping the ball or kicking poorly. England just could not get in the game because of what the opposition were doing.
Scotland were physical, their set-piece was great in attack and defence. The error count was low. The discipline was good. They made England stutter and lose their shape.
The best teams in the world do that consistently.
Usually if I am commenting on a game that England have lost against a team you would say they should beat, I would probably be able to reel off three or four reasons why it happened.
Whether that is key decisions in the game, the bounce of the ball, the referee, the weather. But, quite rightly, all the focus should be on Scotland because it was just an extremely thorough performance that did not let the opposition get into the game.
The camaraderie around the Scotland squad looked very different. Looking at their huddles, how the bench were, how the coaches were with the players – it looked like they had a one-team mentality. That counts for a huge amount.
‘England lacked creativity of other Six Nations fly-halves’
I think there was a selection query over not having George Ford at 10 and instead bringing Owen Farrell in from 12 because there was not enough creativity there for England.
Every other team in the Six Nations has a 10 that can run the game at pace and really attack it.
Scotland have Finn Russell, France have got Matthieu Jalibert, Wales have Dan Biggar, Ireland have Johnny Sexton and Italy have Paolo Garbisi. If they get front-foot ball, they make things happen.
The way that England play, most of the time you can get away with the pragmatic way Farrell plays at 10, but the game seems to be shifting more towards that ‘anything is on at any time’ type of play.
Russell on Saturday was still kicking the ball but in an attacking manner: grubbers through, chips over, cross-field kicks and a massive great spiral down the middle.
He was keeping the back three really occupied and making England get out of position.
England were kicking for territory but Scotland could counter-attack because they have got Stuart Hogg, Sean Maitland and Duhan van der Merwe at the back.
In September, Farrell was given a five-game ban for a high tackle and when he came back into the England team in October he had not played a lot of rugby.
He and the other Saracens boys, except for Maro Itoje, struggled on Saturday. Because they are playing in the Championship, only Billy Vunipola had had any game-time since early December.
Farrell is a fantastic player. He is an England great. I am just not sure, the way the game is at the moment, that 10 is his position.
Having his physicality as well as his distribution at 12 gives England so many more options.
He was up against Russell, who I think is the best 10 in the world at the moment. I do not think anyone has the all-round game that Russell has.
If you are going to play Russell, you have to accept that there will be one or two moments in the game where you wonder what he is doing – like the trip on Ben Youngs that earned him a yellow card – but 95% of what he is doing is beneficial.
‘Lawrence does not have Redpath’s rugby brain’
Farrell could have done so much more than Ollie Lawrence at centre on Saturday.
Lawrence – who earned his fourth England cap in the Scotland defeat – is a nice player at club Worcester but he has a huge amount to learn going into the middle of the backline to run a Test match.
He has not yet got the rugby brain which Scotland debutant Cameron Redpath showed with the way he helped Russell run that game.
Everyone is comparing Lawrence to injured England centre Manu Tuilagi because of his shape but he is still a mile away from Tuilagi’s physicality and ability to change direction and break tackles.
He is not a Tuilagi and I am not sure he ever will be. You are trying to force a game-plan with a player who has not got the skill-set to do that.
Either England do find a genuine Tuilagi replacement – and there are hardly any of those types of players out there – or you have to go with a more skilful second receiver who can dictate the play.
So why not put Farrell there? Then you have George Ford who rips oppositions apart at fly-half.
British and Irish Lions coach Warren Gatland was at Twickenham on Saturday and, if Redpath plays five games like he played on Saturday, he is on the plane. There is no question about that. It was an unbelievable debut.
‘We did not see England’s new attacking intent’
I think defeats like Saturday’s are going to happen more and more with England because teams are starting to understand how they play and are coming up with methods to counter that and take the momentum and sting out of them.
They need to have something else in their armoury other than strong forward play, box-kicks and going through the phases to break the opposition down.
When England get matched up front and do not get dominance in territory and they need to force their attack, they are not well practised enough in game-time to have that style of play.
England talked a lot last week about bringing a new attacking intent but I did not see it.
They play Italy next Saturday, then they have a week off so it has worked out nicely to give them a chance to bounce back.
Last year they lost their opening game to France and still won the Six Nations so you cannot write them off – they have too much quality.
They know how to win tournaments – as they showed when they won the Autumn Nations Cup in sudden death in December.
England have still got to play France, Wales and Ireland and they are not going to say, ‘this is it’.
Going up against Italy after that performance is a perfect opportunity for them to get into the attacking mindset that they keep telling us about.
Matt Dawson was speaking to BBC Sport’s Becky Grey.