Bok's sensible fixture list paying dividends

Eclectic. Those who don't know what that word means might have been a little confused when Bobby Skinstad used it to describe himself in an article printed in a national Sunday newspaper.

Those in the dark should not feel ashamed. There are a lot of people out there who don't know what it means. Put simply, it is the word that we all should use to cover ourselves when we don't know whether we are Arthur or Marthur.

It describes someone who borrows from lots of different philosophies and does not follow or conform to one particular world view or ideology.

In Skinstad's case, what he was saying was that his ideal No8 would not be one particular style of player but a hybrid of different approaches. Sort of like a flyhalf who kicks like Naas Botha but runs like Stephen Larkham.

After four matches in the 2002 international season, Skinstad's word could easily be used to distinguish his coach Rudolf Straeuli from his immediate predecessors. To varying degrees, all three of those who came before Straeuli had one philosophy and one idea about how the game should be played.

Harry Viljoen wanted to run it at all costs, although admittedly circumstance forced him into a much different tack towards the end of his brief stay as coach. Carel du Plessis also wanted to run it, while Nick Mallett was very head-strong and may have been guilty of being the rugby equivalent of an ethnocentric by at all times believing that his way was the only way.

I know that might be unfair to Nick, who was possibly the best of the post-isolation coaches, but those close to him would agree to the statement's validity.

Straeuli appears to be more open minded and more willing to take on different and at times varying rugby philosophies than any of the aforementioned trio.

Many of us thought he would bring with him a type of old fashioned Northern Transvaal subdue and penetrate approach, with a strong emphasis on big forwards and backs who list tackling as their greatest attribute.

But while Straeuli has drawn from the "stick to the basics" philosophy of his late mentor, Kitch Christie, he has also drawn liberally from the running, attacking philosophy of Viljoen and Du Plessis.

Straeuli the selector has also had an element of the eclectic about him. When he started he said all he wanted to do was win every test match.

But did this mean he selected his strongest possible team and avoided experimentation. No siree. After four tests he has chosen 32 players, more than any of his predecessors from the same number of matches during the experimental phases that they were all pilloried for.

Yet have the critics accused him of changing his mind to often, as was the case with Viljoen? Emphatically not.

At times the Boks have played with impressive structure to their game, at others they have been all over the place and have survived purely through the ability of some game-breakers to fashion tries out of nothing. Has Straeuli been accused of not knowing his game-plan? Again the answer is no.

Andy Colquhoun, writing in the Cape Argus, reckons it all has something to do with the astute advice Straeuli has been given by communications manager Mark Keohane. There is a bit of that. Keo probably knows better than anyone how easy it is to pull apart a coach who says he is going to go out and do A and ends up doing Y.

But I think there is another far more straight-forward explanation as to why the Boks are going into this Tri-Nations with their confidence higher than in the three seasons dating back to 1999.

It all comes down to fixture list, which both Viljoen and Mallett were heard to lament on more than one occasion.

Okay, the Boks of 1999 had an easy beginning against lowly Italy. Perhaps too easy, because then they had to play fired up Wales in Cardiff in that infamous summer test and with Mallett experimenting liberally, they were not ready for the ferocity of the opposition assault.

The following season I felt really sorry for Mallett. His pre-season camp at Plettenberg Bay went smoothly and the 50 pointer against Canada seemed the perfect opener. But the other three build-up games to the Tri-Nations were not the sort of clashes designed to build a team's confidence - two home tests against England followed by a Mandela Cup "friendly" against the Aussies in Melbourne.

History reflects that the Boks weren't quite ready for England, who won one of the two tests and sent the nation into a fit of apoplexy which in retrospect was way over the top.

The point though is that at a ridiculously early stage of the year the Boks, and more specifically the coach, was under intense pressure from a dissatisfied rugby public and media.

It was the same story last year. Had the Boks known how good the French were, there is no ways they would have accepted a season pipe-opener against a side that eight months later went on to win the Six Nations.

Scraping home by a few points in Durban a week later did not quite make up for the shame of losing to the French at Ellis Park in the opening match of the season.

Viljoen was under immediate pressure and simply never had the platform he needed for him to make the dramatic changes he believed were necessary.

Instead of ending the preparation phase with confidence boosted, the Boks went into the three nation tournament feeling down and largely written off.

The newlook Springboks of 2002 have had a far saner introduction to international rugby than some of their predecessors had. They have been able to build confidence from one week to the next, something that was necessary after the low of the defeats to France and England on the last end of year tour.

It may work against the Boks in that they are going to require a dramatic step-up in several facets of their play if they hope to live with New Zealand in Wellington.

But at least there should be nothing wrong with their confidence. Someone like Andre Pretorius has now had four games to get used to the green and gold jersey. The All Blacks will be a new challenge, but he has four good games under his belt.

Straeuli might be the first to admit that it could have been different had the Boks started against England or France rather than Wales. In that first test against the Welsh the Boks took 40 minutes to settle down.

Ultimately they showed good temperament by composing themselves and scoring some great tries, but had it been England they were playing they would have been out of the game after half an hour.

Make no mistake, Straeuli and his Boks have made a great start. The coach's no-nonsense approach has paid off and there are few decisions he can be criticised for. But let's be honest and admit that the fixture list has made his task so much easier than it was for those who came before.