Rose the thorn in fans' side

Simnikwe Xabanisa: Apparently one of the reasons the Poms and the Aussies hate us is our supposed lack of a sense of humour. It's a trait that tends to be a bit pronounced in our approach to rugby.

Rugby trades on being a man's game, in which manliness is measured by the number of times Bakkies Botha has to have his face stapled back together on the touchline after flying head-first into yet another ruck.

The latest thing the rugby public is taking seriously is Earl Rose's progress at the Lions. I've been following a website on which all they have to do is mention Rose in a headline and a lot of frothing at the mouth takes place above keyboards around the country.

The thing about Rose is simple: he's really talented, but is incredibly inconsistent and has a self-preservation attitude to tackling.

On a typically inconsistent day, his efforts can be quite comical, free entertainment if you will - if you're not a long-suffering Lions fan.

There are two main gripes against Rose: his outrageously ambitious counter-attacks as a means of getting out of trouble, and his refusal to put his body on the line.

If you played for the Lions and hadn't scented victory in years, wouldn't you turn to a few Hail Marys to get to that Promised Land?

With regard to his defence, playing for the Lions tends to guarantee that one ends up making too many tackles. So, a bit like the bus, if you miss one there should be another along soon.

Also, if you're 50 points down against the Waratahs and big Cliff Palu makes a beeline for you, the smallest man on the field, should you really put yourself in the way of 120kg worth of harm when it's not going to make a bit of difference?

We seem to have this attitude that rugby players should play as if they were playing for our lives when they're actually playing for our entertainment.

Given the wrath directed at Rose, you'd swear he was the sole reason the Lions are losing. The truth is, they were losing by the time he got there and he has simply helped to carry on the tradition.

What most critics miss is that he is played out of position. On current form, Rose - thanks to his vision, an appreciation of space when there's elbow room only, and his sublime distribution - is the Lions' best flyhalf.

If the Lions insist on playing this helter-skelter rugby then Rose is the best guy to keep getting them over the tryline while they leak even more tries. But whether Rose is a flyhalf, or a Springbok, or indeed a figment of Peter de Villiers' imagination, is not the point.

The point is that we shouldn't take him seriously until he takes himself seriously enough to do something about delivering consistent performances.

> Read more columnists