Thumbs up or thumbs down for Spencer?

I heard an interesting thing the other day from one of my mates who is one of the more knowledgable and sensible armchair rugby fans I know.

As he is one of the last six remaining Lions supporters in South Africa I never miss an opportunity to put the boot in and remind him how his team has done and how poorly they have done in the transfer market.

I never miss a chance to remind him how the Stormers unloaded Earl Rose to them and more recently I’ve been pointing out what a kak season Carlos Spencer has been having.

Spencer (in my opinion) has been indifferent and in fact has probably cost the Lions more than he has added. When Burton Francis or even Herkie Kruger has played the Lions seemed to have benefited from their “keep it simple stupid” flyhalf play.

I said Spencer was passed his prime and his tricks are creating havoc for an unsettled backline and it would make far more sense for the ball to simply travel 9-10-12 and off to the wings.

My mate argued that Spencer was still a quality rugby player but was “too advanced” for the Lions team but was still a good acquisition.

So what’s the verdict – Spencer added value or been a costly blunder for the Lions this year?

———

Buy your winning lotto tickets. Play Now! – UK and EuroMillions at Lottery24.com Click Here

2nd test - Boks vs. the B&I Lions

The 2nd test match between the British & Irish Lions and the Springboks was an intriguing face-off.

The loss of Burger in the first 30 seconds of the match gave the Lions something to get back "go forward" and they never really looked like giving it up until some late second half substitutions changed things around.

Some observations on the game:

Uncontested scrums:
From the 45th minute of the test match there were uncontested scrums and yet we still stuck to three genuine front-rankers while the Lions enjoyed far more mobility

Jaque Fourie:
Fourie was again expected to come off the bench and make an impact. While I appreciate what Adi Jacobs brings to the side, I don't understand why Peter Devilliers is so hesitant to pair Jean Devilliers with Fourie considering the size and strength of the B&I centres?!

Spies better off the bench:
If you're looking for a way to incorporate the foraging ability of Brussouw as well as Burger and Juan Smith then why not move Burger to 8 and let Spies come off the bench as the impact player for the last 20 minutes or so? Sure he could inflict a lot of pain if used in this manner?

Headache at flyhalf?:
Ruan Pienaar had a competent performance at flyhalf last week but this time around he just didn't click. The side looked far more structured when Steyn came on. (I'm not a Steyn fan but he did the job today).

Dunno

Why did Earl Rose not play flyhalf?

The worst thing about being a top level coach is that when your selection decisions don’t come off you have journalists, bloggers and sports commentators spending the next day telling you what you did wrong.

But I guess that that is part and parcel of the job, as unfair as it may be.

One decision I did find quite curious this weekend was Eugene (Loffie) Eloff’s decision not to play Earl Rose at flyhalf in the Currie Cup semi-final match against the Sharks.

Now just to clarify – I don’t rate Earl Rose particularly highly and have blogged on that topic before.

But Rose has been mentioned as a potential for the Springbok touring side at the end of the year and he is currently the leading points scorer in the Currie Cup. Most importantly, he has been the first choice flyhalf for the Lions for the majority of this season.

Eloff himself has said that he believes Rose will be a Bok flyhalf but he shouldn’t be rushed.

Despite this Eloff decided for the crunch semi-final he would instead shift Rose to Fullback and field Louis Strydom at flyhalf. (Bear in mind that the last time these two sides met two weeks earlier, Strydom came on as a late replacement and covered himself in glory by throwing the intercept pass that sealed the game for the Sharks.)

My ‘arm-chair’ concern is that Eloff sent out the message that he does not trust Rose in the big games because he may be targeted.

What does the rest of the team take out of the decision?

Does that not pass on a message to the rest of the team that Eloff does not believe the system they have employed for the rest of the season will be sufficient to carry them through?

Hindsight is obviously 20/20 and if Strydom had had a blinder or Rose had scalped them from the fullback position, I probably wouldn’t be writing this. It just doesn’t seem to make much sense to me that you would publicly talk about all the faith you hold in a player and then shift them around when the crunch came….

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.

Statistics and Dan Carter

Statistics are an interesting thing to look at when trying to understand how a team played and how a particular individual is doing in a position.

Today an interesting statistic popped up relating to Dan Carter's performance against the Springboks.

Basically the All Blacks were leading South Africa 5-0 about 58 minutes into the game and it could still have gone either way.

Carters statistics at the time read:

Balls Passed - 10
Balls Kicked - 14
Tackles made - 2
Defenders beaten - 0

Statistics tell you 2 things - the Boks weren't prepared to run at the Carter channel and Carter wasn't going to mix it up with the Bok defenders by trying to take them on.

Instead he was quite happy to mix it up by spreading it wide and kicking tactically into the corners. (Which he did like a machine).

The first time Carter beat a defender was when he straightened the line and scored the second All Black try.

Instead of trying to take the defenders on, Carter was quite happy to let the line do the work while he marshalled the troops and controlled the pace. I agree completely that Butch James is a type of flyhalf but the problem is that where Carter seems to be able to decide the game he is planning to play, James seems to be one dimensional in what he is going to work. When it comes off, it looks great, but when it doesn't he can't seem to get his backline going forward.

I don't believe its an issue that James can't play a dynamic game, I just don't think he is being given the responsibility of dictating the pace in the backline.

Its almost like the backline kicking game for the Boks comes from whoever is playing scrum half and the creativity is expected to come from Jean De Villiers as the outside centre.

That means positions 9 and 13 are dictating how the game is going to be played... Doesn't sound right.

Will be interesting to see how the Bok coach responds over the next 2 fixtures against the Australians...

Snappy service - Scrumhalf

Yesterday when the Springboks took on Argentina, the value of snappy service from Scrumhalf to Flyhalf was proven.

Ricky Januarie started the game at Scrumhalf with Butch James at flyhalf. Now Butch James isn't the smallest guy around and the defence around the fringes / flyhalf for the Argentinians is probably not as intimidating as say they All Blacks or the Australians.

Yet South Africa battled to break this first channel repeatedly and the first try (that came through this gap) was a fluffed pass from Januarie that Jean Devilliers recovered and went through.

The problem was the slow service from Januarie meant that James was taking it static and the flyhalf was then being swamped or play was "crabbing" sideways across the field.

When Fourie Du Preez came on, the game changed. James was getting snappy service before the Argentinians had recovered, he and the centres could then pick their gaps and hit them at speed.
Coach your scrumhalves to understand why they should be snapping the ball out as quickly as possible. Show them the value of hitting the opposition before the backline has fanned out and the half gaps in the first channels are still open while players either commit to the ruck or fall back.

It will make the world of difference to their game play.