1. Skip to content

Sports Think Tank - Guardian Leader - School sports: Our children's sporting dreams betrayed

"A sports think tank would be a great legacy from the 2012 games, enabling future generations to benefit from long term, well researched, and evidence-based sports policy making in the UK" Seb Coe

Sports Think Tank

Sports Think Tank

31-32 Bedford Street
Covent Garden
+44 20 3239 3380

Download vCard

Guardian Leader - School sports: Our children's sporting dreams betrayed

Posted: Sun, 08 Jul 2012 22:12

Today on the day that Andy Murray didn't quite live up to the nation's expectations the Guardian used its Leader Column to ask a deeper question about school sport policy. It is an issue deep in the heart for those of us at the Think Tank. When I was working in DCMS in the late 90s I was acutely aware that the department could only have a marginal impact on sport and physical activity if we still had really poor provision of PE & Sport in our state schools. I was there when the SSPs were promoted and developed. We aer not here to say they were perfect as we will be evidence based here at the Think Tank. But we have now lost that infrastructure and replaced it with a 'School Games' based on little more than a panic reaction to the £168m cuts. Nobody seriously in the sector sees them as a replacement.

But we are not here to play a blame game. Our job and that of the sector is to set you what we believe a policy aims to set out to achieve and then how to design a system that will gain a political consensus to deliver that vision.

So here is the Guardian Leader and then it we want to open up the debate and if we can secure funding to produce a report which sets out the way forward.


Today, Andy Murray becomes the first Briton to walk out on the Centre Court at Wimbledon to compete in a men's singles final since Bunny Austin in 1938. Whether or not he goes the same way as Austin did all those years ago (he lost – in straight sets to the American Don Budge) it will be a truly great moment for British sport.

In three weeks' time London will stage the Olympic Games for the first time since 1948. The preparations have gone well and the world's greatest athletes are about to arrive in our capital from every corner of the globe. The next few weeks will, as David Cameron said in a speech last week, be "simply amazing" for sport in Britain.

Politicians miss few chances to associate themselves with sporting successes, and Cameron is no different. He rushed out a statement within minutes of Murray's triumph on Friday evening, congratulating him and saying he would be there on Centre Court to cheer him on. That is all well and good. The prime minister was right in his speech last week to stress that "sport can change lives".

Stars at the Olympics, like those at Wimbledon, can inspire young people to develop their own talents and build their own self-respect, whether they are brilliant or just run-of-the-mill at the games they learn to love. Team sports help bind people and communities together. Sport brings young people out of themselves, away from computer and television screens. It makes them healthy and motivated. A British Wimbledon finalist – champion perhaps? – and British Olympic medallists will be wonderful role models for our young.

But we should not let this country's political leaders – particularly the current ones – take even the smallest slice of credit for the state of sport in our society just because Andy Murray has done well at Wimbledon or because Mark Cavendish or Rebecca Adlington might end up with gold medals round their necks. In a politically careless section of the same speech, Cameron highlighted the scandalous way in which school sport in this country lets down all but a small privately educated elite, and the very rare state-educated jewels such as Murray or Adlington who succeed despite state school provision, rather than because of it.

The prime minister asked why it was "that in so many schools sport has been squeezed out and facilities run down?" In the next sentence he went on to say: "The result is that independent schools produce more than their fair share of medal winners… and too many children think taking part just isn't for them."

Indeed they do. Colin Moynihan, chairman of the British Olympic Association, told this newspaper last year that it was "unacceptable" that at the last Olympics, in Beijing in 2008, 50% of British medal winners came from private schools, despite the fact that the independent sector accounts for only 7% of pupils. The ratio this time is unlikely to be hugely different. Just as privately educated pupils go on to dominate top positions in our politics, our media and our professions, so they dominate much of our sport – a phenomenon the education secretary Michael Gove described recently as "morally indefensible".

So what has Cameron's government done to narrow the class divide in our sporting provision? Having built his leadership of the Tory party around the idea of a "big society", did Cameron think of boosting sport in schools and communities to help make sense of that mission? Did he make sport more central to school and community life and mobilise the millions of big society volunteers, those parents and sports lovers who adore running teams and clubs, in a national, linked-up sporting effort, connecting clubs to schools and schools to clubs? Did he insist that private schools do more to share their luscious playing fields and flash sports centres with state schools, which often have none, in return for earning their tax perk of charitable status? No. Not a bit of it.

One of the first acts of his government saw Michael Gove withdraw the entire budget of £160m a year in funding for school sports partnerships, a network created by Labour under which state schools shared sports and PE teachers and co-ordinated activity to ensure that all pupils had decent minimum levels of expert sporting tuition. If a primary school had no PE teachers, they would be lent one.

The partnerships were working well in most areas, and would have allowed the country to boast a real legacy from the Olympics after decades which saw school playing fields sold off. But Gove thought the partnerships were about state control and bureaucracy. He was suspicious because they were set up by Labour. He never visited a single partnership before announcing he would close the lot. The vast majority of headteachers were appalled. Gove was forced into a partial U-turn that saved the scheme for a year or so – but now all funding has gone.

In their place Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, furious at Gove's destruction, created the "school games" in a great hurry to plug the gap – an annual Olympic-style sports competition for schools. While much effort has gone into getting the project going, it is deeply flawed as a national model because many schools, particularly primaries, do not have the facilities or staff to allow them to take part. Just 14,000 out of more than 24,000 schools participated this year – when the intention was that all of them would. Fewer than half the schools in London signed up. For the rest, nothing. No school games.

What kind of a national system of school sport is that? Cameron replies that £1bn is being put into youth sport and that more school sports clubs are being set up. It is true that much good work is being done, but the crucial inter-school structures that were being created and that were introducing children from primary schools upwards to sports they would otherwise never enjoy, are now non-existent across large parts of the country.

In 2006 Sebastian Coe, the chairman of London 2012, said: "Winning the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games represents the single biggest opportunity in our lifetime to transform sport and participation in sport in the UK forever. We have a unique opportunity that we must not squander to increase participation in sport, at community and grassroots levels as well as elite levels; from the school playground to the winner's podium."

The brilliant Andy Murray and our medal winners in weeks to come will inspire our youngsters no end. But they deserve more than inspiration. All pupils – not just those whose parents can afford to buy them the best – deserve a school sports legacy from 2012. It is a disgrace, and a tragedy for them, that more has not been done to provide one.

Tags: The Guardian, PE, Schools sports, Policy

Comments (88)

1. Paul Kitchin said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 22:38:

My original point was that development sport should include community as well as school. I feel school sport is part of problem of creating those for sport or thopse against it. Community sport is better for creating sporty intereste but community links also (withoutt the focus on winnning that seems to dominate school sport). Kids should learn to win or lose but the issues is how it is managed. I dont trust enough PE teachers to make the distinction.

2. Richard Bailey said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 22:53:

I offer a few structural / intellectual problems that have and continue to hold back PE and school sport:

1) lack of agreement regarding the primary aims of the activity. Heath? Fitness? Skills? Life-long activity? Character-building? Talent Development? All of these and more have been proposed as rationales for the subject.

2) almost continuous political interference. If you excuse the pun, PE and sport are 'political football', and politicians interfere with generally ill-thought-out views to score an easy media goal! Thus we are presented with the perennial calls for 'more competition', despite the fact that England previously had the most comprehensive competitive you sport structure in the world

3) generally poor primary experience. The Primary phases is the key period in the development of sporting skills and habits, yet it is normally taught by teachers with less than 10 hours PE teacher training. Many children have their first structured sporting experiences when they enter secondary school, and this may be too late for their motor development.

4) there is no professional busy to which the majority of professions subscribe. Thus professional influence over developing policy has been minimal.

5) the greatest non-government influence was simply handed over to a quasi-political agency with no representative professional role.

6) neither PE nor school sport has been significantly informed or influenced by research.

There are strengths as well, of course, but it seems to me that our greatest urgency is daring to take our problems seriously.

If the UK / England is to move towards a rational, fair and effective system, it needs to address these issues. And, it seems to me, the best way to do this is to enter an open and honest discussion involving all interested parties. This would be a truly radical advance.

3. Richard Bailey said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:00:

I was obviously typing whilst Paul was posting his note, so I will add a seventh 'problem', namely that there need to be much more coherent links between school and community sport! However, we also need to acknowledge that community has not succeeded in attracted more than a fraction of young people (20-25% was a recent figure), and this minority are not necessarily selected by interest or ability. Many young people are excluded because they simply cannot access them. At the moment, there is only one context in which all young people are able to access formal, structured sport, and that is School, FOr that reason, it seems to me that School needs to remain the foundation.

4. Matthew J. reeves said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:00:

My original involvement in the twitter debate began on the idea of PE/sport being moved away from education.

The question I posed was 'what has PE done well'?

Please forgive me as I am playing devils advocate somewhat. I know there are a number of positive outcomes from PE, but am also acutely aware of the issues it has. To that end, should continuation of a system which has not sustained a number of key outcomes be allowed, or is it time to rethink the entire system?

I, personally, have said for a number of years that I see a system in the future where PE teachers do not exist and are instead replaced by coaches. Again, reliant on a number of external factors, but easy to imagine sooner than later under the current government.

5. Paul Kitchin said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:05:

Hi Richard,

My personal views of course.

Until schools are ranked on PE performance (maybe in health stats) then primary teachers will forever be poorly trained.

You wont get uk-wide consensus with PE and school sport so probably best to go with Great Britain, or England first.

Finally and not trying to be overly controversial but the main reason you get marmite opinions about school sport and PE is because individuals have with had a positive or negative experience with it in ones time at school. Each result make a camp of people who defend it or attack it. So while I agree with point 1 absolutely I think that point 4 is the reason why this won't occur. There seem to be so many factions within PE (defenders) and school the idea of a professional body would be great - but it would have to be a big tent. For the attackers they all have their own reasons for their view but they see defenders as all the same.

6. Paul k said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:08:


I like radical, I really do. However I would suggest that instead of go your way I would train every PE teacher to teach numeracy and literacy through sport, and increase contact hours. That way it would contribute to the more dominant educational powers when policy decisions a made.


7. Richard Bailey said on Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:18:

Matthew and Paul raise valid and important points, and highlight profound problems with the current situation. What's needed in leadership and a sense of direction.

In my view, the biggest single advance we could make would be to establish an independent advisory body for sport, similar to the National Institute of Clinical Excellence for medicine. Dave Collins and I recently argued for this in response to NGB's tendency to adopt non-evidenced nonsense in talent development. But it could easily be extended to encompass all aspects of sport: to offer informed comment about curriculum PE; to review the evidence of the relationship between sport and obesity; to judge the legacy of 2012.

8. Andy Reed said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 10:29:

Thanks for these so far. Having been involved at the heart of the interference from government I wholeheartedly agree with the criticism of this approach. Each new Minister brings their own limited worldview to a portfolio and tries to 'leave their mark'. It is why we set up this think tank to create a longer term consensus around the evidence of good policy.

Richard as ask the first right question - why do we want to do sport/PE in schools - for its own sake or as a lifeskill? Or is it fitness, social skills etc. We have to decide what it is we wish to achieve if there is a consensus that we have it in schools like we would maths and english.

I hope we can widen this a little more and then do as Richard suggests - find a body/ way to provide evidence like NICE. The landscape is too fragmented at present. If we could widen the debate here a little more and then I will come up with some ways of channelling the energy into something coherent if people like the idea. I guess there will be some kind of reshuffle after the Olympics so we may have some new ministers to work with!

9. Greg Dryer said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:03:

Very encouraging and much needed discussion. I convened a round table discussion a few months ago called 'From Paper to Practice'. It was well attended. There's cleverly a need for this type of body.

As for my penny's worth....
Some of the divisions are artificial. It's not sport v PE or teachers v coaches but rather pedagogically aware/critical, progressive, child focused practitioners v sport centred practitioners. I have had the pleasure of working with some people in sport and some NGB's who are articulating the educative language of PE far more than most schools I work with.
If legacy is going to mean anything, it's the evangelical energy of the progressives that needs to be harnessed. Change is desperately required in PE and sport. The status quo has not and never will work unless of course success is "merely" about Wimbledon finalists, TdF leaders and Olympic medals.

10. Steve Smith said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:03:

There are a number of issues that have been briefly highlighted here. To me there are a few issues that need addressing.
Funding will always be the key one and is something that has been a problem for years. When I was at school, the sports equipment was completely worn out and barely fit for purpose. If, for example in hockey, you could not bring your own equipment you were stuck with a stick that was 3/4 worn away on the corner.
Coaching standards. Andy Murray was taught in Spain which is the reason for his success. The skill levels of our sports men and women is often lower due to deficiencies in our coaching. This has been highlighted in several sports over the years including, most notably, Euro 2012. (funding again is an issue) I know that many sports are trying to address this issue with the change in coaching levels so hopefully this will improve; but this needs to keep evolving and improving. Certainly in our schools our PE coaches have to be "jack of all trades" with perhaps one or two specific favourite sports they have a greater knowledge of. It would be great if there were more senior coaches spending time working with schools to improve standards. (For example; schools in the Leicestershire area spending some time at the Leicester Tigers or Leicestershire County training ground doing some rugby training)
16-21 gap. For many sports, we seem to do well until we reach this age group. Part of this is the gap of quality University sports levels. Many universities simply do not have the sporting facilities/coaches required. In comparison with the USA we are stuck in the dark ages.
The last thing I would raise is the "who you know" culture that dominates sport in this country. For cricket, getting through to the county set up doesn't just require ability, it requires you to know the right person, play for the right club and/or go to the right school. This desperately needs addressing. I have spoken to many sports people who claim this is a problem in their sport.
I could write or discuss this for hours, but have to get back to work.

11. BarbaraBell said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:46:

One of reasons why the independent/private sector is overrepresented in top level sport is that they provide really good physical education AND a strong support for sporting performers. They reinforce the expectation that sport is of benefit to the children and the school by their investment in it. Many of those who are in the performance system by teenage years will have been offered scholarships by schools who want to improve their school performance and maintain high standards (a la Tom Daley for example) - they provide the lifestyle and support that local schools cannot or will not normally provide - excellent facilities, great staff, combination of academic support flexible to performers needs and pastoral support. The state system is too hit and miss in terms of standards in PE and as earlier comments have made clear, the support at the primary level, essential for motor and physical developement as well as forming positive psychological attitudes to activity, play and sport, is simply not well enough embedded. A good school will have good PE because its part of a rounded approach to developing children. But we rely on an inspirational teacher who goes above and beyond at this level or a Head with a strong commitment to provide good PE despite not because of the system. Under the previous government, while school sport might have been moving ahead, I'm not sure the bulk of PE teachers and schools were sufficiently recognised for their efforts, so while there was a 'backlash' against funding cuts and a partial U turn, the PE professionals seem to be struggling to show how successful they are in terms of their outcomes in child activity levels and choices after school - ie how well state physical education is doing can be looked at in terms of adult activity levels - the generation who have had a 'national curriculum' appear to be no better educated physically - and girls in particular have remained less active and less likely to chose sport. The independent sector can say, look how we turn out great sports people! Look how many go on to good universities too!
At the same time, some sport organisations have also been slow to recognise they need to change, if they want to grow participants from wider school- aged population, rather than compete with other sports for the children who dont like football or dont progress in it. At the moment they still seem to be mainly interested in those who can join squads, clubs and perform well early - not those who will be their 'members' for adult life, who may need more nurturing and will only ever perform at a recreational level. As this is the majority of the school aged population, lots of children with aspirations and enthusiasm get 'dropped' far too soon restrictive selection policy for development squads - 12 year olds told they arent good enough - I really dont think there is a drop off as much as a turn off - sport rejects young people as much as young people reject an activity that doesnt seem to have anything to offer them. To get back to the independent/state divide - in the private envirnoment, young people are kept in to a system which positively welcomes them and supports them (at a cost of course), so as progressively fewer teenagers remain in a sport, the private sector get higher proportions in performance environments. You only have to look at the rate of conversion from junior performance - national squads- to athletes representing GB in the Olympics to see how narrow are the pathways for young people and that the majority of children to achieve that level - room at the top is still limited! PE in schools needs to be more concerned with the majority of children who will not reach that level of performance, nor aspire to it and a foundation for activity and health.

12. Richard Bailey said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:18:

This is proving to be a very encouraging discussion, thank you everyone.

I'm a little less sure that the UK is disadvantaged in terms in funding than some. I've worked as UNESCO Expert Advisor and research around the world, and know that we are well towards the top of the international league table, although much more for curriculum investment than capital investment. Things are no perfect, but compared to most countries, we are lucky!

And although I have a reputation for being a critic of the last government's education and sports agenda, I have to acknowledge that no country in the world had a PE and sport framework as comprehensive as PESSCL/PESSYP. There were problems with the management, accountability and vision, perhaps, but it is difficult to argue that he government delivered of its manifesto promises in this regard. If the current government had stuck with PESSYP, and looked properly at facilities and community sport, we'd have a system that was the envy of the world.

13. Sam O'Connor said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:53:

As a student who grew through secondary school with SSP's; working closely with the teaching staff became a regular occurance for me as Sport Ambassador. Despite the break up of the school sport partnerships the work that they were established to do still takes place in my locality, moreover despite studying at university more than 150 miles away I still make the effort to travel back and volunteer my time to promote the values of sport and the potential it offers young people. This is precisely how the Big Society is intended to work. As an athlete who understands everything sport and competition has to offer at school level in terms of both talent identification and health benefits I expect that secondary schools should work to promote themselves within their communities by coordinating primary school events, as occurs in my locality for numerous sports and that I myself actively take a role in, furthermore by bringing in coaches from the local area to improve the quality of the provisions for sport at secondary school age. To suggest that an absurd budget in excess of £160 million is necessary is simply not true. Admittedly axing the entire budget was more extreme than actions I would have chosen to take myself, however savings were obviously there to be made.

14. Sam O'Connor said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:53:

As a student who grew through secondary school with SSP's; working closely with the teaching staff became a regular occurance for me as Sport Ambassador. Despite the break up of the school sport partnerships the work that they were established to do still takes place in my locality, moreover despite studying at university more than 150 miles away I still make the effort to travel back and volunteer my time to promote the values of sport and the potential it offers young people. This is precisely how the Big Society is intended to work. As an athlete who understands everything sport and competition has to offer at school level in terms of both talent identification and health benefits I expect that secondary schools should work to promote themselves within their communities by coordinating primary school events, as occurs in my locality for numerous sports and that I myself actively take a role in, furthermore by bringing in coaches from the local area to improve the quality of the provisions for sport at secondary school age. To suggest that an absurd budget in excess of £160 million is necessary is simply not true. Admittedly axing the entire budget was more extreme than actions I would have chosen to take myself, however savings were obviously there to be made.

15. Jannine Thompson said on Mon, 09 Jul 2012 19:06:

It's funny as teachers (for those of us that are) we focus on providing positive and constructive feedback, giving praise, and being clear and consistent in our approach in order to engage learners. However, that seems totally at contrast to the way education (and in my experience particularly physical education) is approached by the government, and indeed some other people involved in the world of physical education and sport (or not as the case may be). As a PE TEACHER (not coach) my job has never been, nor will it ever be to produce the countries highest performing sportsmen and women, that would be to the complete detriment to the many pupils I work with who are simply not at that level, and if that was my ambition I would have become a SPORTS COACH. I think Richard is right in suggesting that there needs to be clearer idea regarding what the purpose of PE is and ensure this is a consensus rather than just personal opinion in order for the subject to become less fragmented. However, throughout my undergraduate years and in the early stages of my career I have spent a fair amount of time looking in to this issue and one thing that continues to amaze me is the negative attention PE seems to attract, perhaps if people spent more time focusing on the positive, rather than pointing out the negative (which is always the easiest option), we could spend less energy on defending our subject and devote more time to becoming the subject we want to be. I know from first hand experience the extremely positive impact physical education can have on a young persons life, and I would like to think I am going some way to becoming a teacher who can provide such experiences on a daily basis, after all I am a teacher of PE and this is my trade I have spent several years studying and developing my trade and will continue to do so, so wouldn't I or some of my pupils (or indeed many of my colleagues and their pupils in similar positions) be a good person to ask regarding the future of PE and what we see for it. Of course there are some instances where this may occur, but there are still far too many where it doesn't, and moreover there seem to be far too many people, who both wrongly and rightly placed, want to have their say and I believe this continues to hold us back.

16. cheap_cialis said on Tue, 20 May 2014 00:43:

cialis , cheap cialis , generic viagra , online cialis , generic cialis ,

17. viagra said on Tue, 20 May 2014 04:09:

viagra , cialis , cialis , viagra ,

18. generic said on Tue, 20 May 2014 15:33:

generic viagra , generic cialis , cheap generic viagra , cheap generic cialis ,

19. cheap_viagra said on Tue, 20 May 2014 22:27:

online viagra , order cialis online , cheap viagra , cheap cialis ,

21. viagra said on Wed, 21 May 2014 04:40:

viagra , cialis , viagra , cialis ,

23. cialis said on Thu, 22 May 2014 10:22:

cialis , cialis , cialis , viagra ,

24. viagra said on Sat, 24 May 2014 11:08:

buy viagra in canada , cialis online , cialis online , buy viagra in canada ,

25. order_viagra said on Sat, 24 May 2014 18:42:

order viagra , order viagra , generic cialis pills , order viagra , order viagra ,

28. online said on Thu, 29 May 2014 11:55:

cialis , cialis online , viagra online pharmacy , generic cialis , viagra online pharmacy ,

30. pills said on Sat, 31 May 2014 13:50:

viagra , cialis , viagra pills online , cialis pills online ,

31. cialis said on Sun, 01 Jun 2014 04:28:

cialis , cialis , viagra , cialis , viagra ,

32. cialis_online said on Sun, 01 Jun 2014 05:19:

cialis online , cialis , cialis , cheap cialis ,

33. viagra said on Mon, 02 Jun 2014 15:28:

viagra , cialis , cheap viagra , cheap cialis ,

36. free_viagra said on Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:11:

free viagra , q buy cialis online , free viagra , free viagra , q buy cialis online ,

37. cialis said on Wed, 04 Jun 2014 22:28:

cialis , cialis , viagra , viagra , cialis ,

39. canadian_cialis said on Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:11:

canadian viagra , canadian cialis , canadian viagra , cialis uk , viagra uk ,

40. viagra said on Fri, 06 Jun 2014 06:31:

cialis , viagra , cialis , viagra , cialis ,

42. generic_cialis said on Sun, 08 Jun 2014 05:50:

fast delivery cialis , generic cialis , buy cialis , buy viagra , cialis online ,

45. viagra said on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:11:

cialis , viagra , cialis , viagra , cialis ,

47. viagra_cost said on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 12:49:

buy viagra , viagra cost , generic viagra , buy cialis , canadian viagra ,

48. viagra said on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 21:20:

cialis , viagra , cialis , viagra , cialis ,

51. cialis said on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 06:00:

viagra , buy cialis softtabs , viagra , buy cialis softtabs , viagra ,

52. viagra said on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 03:26:

viagra , cialis , viagra , cialis , viagra ,

56. pharmacy said on Thu, 19 Jun 2014 07:29:

online pharmacy viagra , online pharmacy cialis , viagra no script , cialis no script ,

61. to said on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 16:30:

where to buy cialis , where to buy viagra , how to buy viagra , how to buy cialis ,

66. cialis_online said on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 21:11:

cialis , buy cialis online , cheap cialis , cialis online , buy cialis ,

67. cialis said on Sun, 29 Jun 2014 13:14:

cheap cialis , cialis price , cheap cialis , online cialis , buy cialis online ,

68. cialis said on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 23:06:

viagra , cialis , cialis , viagra ,

71. viagra said on Wed, 02 Jul 2014 18:47:

viagra , free cialis pills , viagra , cialis , buy cialis online ,

73. cialis said on Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:31:

cialis , viagra , cialis , cialis , viagra ,

74. cialis_online said on Sat, 05 Jul 2014 15:50:

viagra generic , generic cialis , viagra online , cialis online ,

75. cialis said on Sat, 05 Jul 2014 21:25:

cialis , cialis , viagra , viagra , buy cialis ,

78. cialis_price said on Sun, 06 Jul 2014 10:54:

viagra samples , cialis samples , viagra price , cialis price ,

79. cialis said on Tue, 08 Jul 2014 18:28:

cialis , viagra , viagra , cialis ,

81. cialis said on Mon, 14 Jul 2014 22:01:

cheap viagra online , cheap cialis online , viagra , cialis ,

82. generic said on Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:03:

buy generic cialis , cheap viagra , online pharmacy viagra , purchase viagra , purchase cialis ,

83. viagra_canada said on Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:06:

viagra canada , cialis canada , viagra price , cialis price ,

84. without said on Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:13:

cheap viagra , cheap cialis , viagra without prescription , cialis without prescription ,

85. cheap_viagra said on Thu, 17 Jul 2014 23:31:

cialis , cheap viagra , viagra , cialis , buy cialis ,

86. generic said on Fri, 18 Jul 2014 01:57:

generic viagra online , generic cialis online , buy generic viagra , buy generic cialis ,

88. fast said on Tue, 22 Jul 2014 01:45:

pills viagra , pills cialis , viagra fast delivery , cialis fast delivery ,

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.