Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
26 April 2022 | Story Dr Qinisani Qwabe
Dr Qinisani Qwabe
Dr Qinisani Qwabe

South Africa recently witnessed a catastrophic natural disaster that resulted in the loss of life, livelihoods, and infrastructural damage. This occurred in KwaZulu-Natal where hundreds of people lost their lives as a result of extensive flooding and mudslides. President Cyril Ramaphosa declared a national state of disaster to which we should all respond. Specific reference was made to the public and private sectors, as well as civil society.

While I applaud the various stakeholders that have extended a helping hand, my heart bleeds for the vulnerable groups whose voices remain unheard, even under normal circumstances. One cannot help but wonder if aid will reach the isolated regions that suffered the adverse effects of these heavy rains, or if all developmental efforts will be prioritised to certain economic hubs of the province such as the eThekwini Metro and the capital, uMgungundlovu.

KwaZulu-Natal is among the poorest provinces in the country. Corroborating this claim is a report that was released by Statistics South Africa earlier this year which reveals that about 52% of the province’s population are considered to be ‘poor’,and live at the lower end of the poverty line.

Drawing from my experiences of the rural communities of KwaZulu-Natal with whom I have worked, many suffer from the triple challenge of poverty, inequality, and unemployment, and rely on agriculture for their livelihood and to put food on the table. Their supplementary income is obtained from government support grants. The graphic scenes that have been shown on the media illustrate the devastating effects of the heavy rains in regions within the agricultural sector. Fields have been washed away, crops and livestock have been lost. This is happening when the province is still trying to resuscitate its economy after the widespread looting that took place in July last year, which had a calamitous effect on businesses and livelihoods.

While this is an injury mainly for the people of KwaZulu-Natal, it is my wish that we all join hands in contributing towards the restoration of livelihoods. In agreement with the president’s assertion, we can all play a part in rebuilding the province. This includes institutions of higher learning, particularly the Community Engagement Directorates whose mandate is to drive socioeconomic development to external communities.

Related article:
Opinion: KZN floods expose significant socio-economic and environmental vulnerabilities

KZN FLOODS

News Archive

UFS study shows playing time in Super Rugby matches decreasing
2016-12-19

Description: Super Rugby playing time Tags: Super Rugby playing time 

The study by Riaan Schoeman, (left), Prof Robert Schall,
and Prof Derik Coetzee from the University of the Free State
on variables in Super Rugby can provide coaches with
insight on how to approach the game.
Photo: Anja Aucamp

It is better for Super Rugby teams not to have the ball, which also leads to reduced overall playing time in matches.

This observation is from a study by the University of the Free State on the difference between winning and losing teams. Statistics between 2011 and 2015 show that Super Rugby winning teams kick more and their defence is better.

These statistics were applied by Riaan Schoeman, lecturer in Exercise and Sport Sciences, Prof Derik Coetzee, Head of Department: Exercise and Sport Sciences, and Prof Robert Schall, Department of Mathematics and Actuarial Sciences. The purpose of the study, Changes in match variables for winning and losing teams in Super Rugby from 2011 to 2015, was to observe changes. Data on 30 games (four from each team) per season, supplied by the Cheetahs via Verusco TryMaker Pro, were used.

About two minutes less action
“We found that the playing time has decreased. This is the time the ball is in play during 80 minutes,” says Schoeman. In 2011, the average playing time was 34.12 minutes and in 2015 it was 31.95.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball and doesn’t want it. They play more conservatively. They dominate with kicks and then they play,” says Prof Coetzee, who was the conditioning coach for the Springboks in 2007 when they won the World Cup.

Lineouts also more about kicking
As a result, the number of line-outs also increased (from 0.31 per minute in 2011 to 0.34 in 2015) and the winning teams are better in this regard.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball
and doesn’t want it. They play a more conservative
game. They dominate with kicks and then they play.”

Schoeman believes that rule changes could also have contributed to reduced playing time, since something like scrum work nowadays causes more problems. “When a scrum falls, the time thereafter is not playing time.”

According to Prof Coetzee, rucks and mauls have also increased, (rucks from 2.08 per minute in 2011 to 2.16 in 2015 and mauls from 0.07 per minute in 2011 to 0.10 in 2015). “The teams that win, dominate these areas,” he says.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept