Earl Rose

I’ve been reading a lot of commentary about Earl Rose in recent weeks. Specifically about how he has the ability to combine the sublime with the ridiculous and how his ball skills have made him a shoe-in for the end of season Springbok touring side.

At present, Rose is currently the top points-scorer and he has been part of a Lions squad that seems to have rejuvenated itself since the start of the season. The question is – how much has Rose contributed to this revolution and how much has he cost the Lions this season… and ultimately is he good enough to be the Springbok flyhalf?

Upfront I’m going to make it clear – I didn’t like Rose when he was at Western Province / Stormers and I personally believe that Rose cost the Lions in the Super 14. Do I think he cost the Lions yesterday against the Sharks in the Currie Cup? ABSOLUTELY…

That try for the Sharks where Rose aimlessly kicked it into the charging Sharks backline should be enough to confirm why he should not be selected to play for the Springbok side.

Of course mistakes happen and players make the wrong choices – but with Rose they seem to happen too often in the big games. The choices to run from behind his own goal line or attempts to try and outmuscle some of the worlds’ best flankers or kick into some of the worlds best backline players are mistakes he makes on a regular basis – composure is everything for a flyhalf.

One also has to look at the way Rose plays when considering whether he would be suitable for a Springbok place. I know that Pieter Devilliers is a bit of a fan of his, but ‘Div’ also needs to consider whether or not Rose will actually get a backline firing or not.

Whoever ends up being the Bok flyhalf will be fortunate to have two of Jacques Fourie, Jean Devilliers, AD Jacobs and Frans Steyn outside them – muscular, game breaking centres…

They don’t need a flyhalf who is going to try and be a picture of creative flair. This is why Butch James and Peter Grant fit so well into this system. Both are solid defenders and can take the contact and both (in theory) try and do the basics right.

At the end of the day, as a coach, you have to use what you have. If you don’t have a Dan Carter in your backline to get it firing but you have some super creative centres – then this is where your backline play can come from. There is no point trying to make a player fit a game plan that isn’t there.

Experimenting is great but rather experiment with what you have rather than move away from the game plan that plays to your strengths.