Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
23 September 2022 | Story Anthony Mthembu | Photo iFlair Photography
Umakhoyane
Umakhoyane: Indigenous South African instrument affiliated with the Zulu tribe.

According to Dr Absolum Nkosi, Senior Lecturer in the Odeion School of Music at the University of the Free State (UFS), “ancient traditional instruments form part of the African heritage”. As such, with Heritage Day upon us, it is imperative to highlight these South African indigenous musical instruments. 

Some of the most prominent South African musical instruments currently in the possession of the UFS, include uhadi and umakhoyane, also referred to as ugubhu. At first glance, one would think that these instruments are the same. This would not be an incorrect assumption. In fact, these instruments share similarities in terms of purpose and how they have been used throughout their existence. 

Similarities and differences between the instruments
For instance, both uhadi and umakhoyane (ugubhu) are instruments traditionally played by women. Dr Nkosi maintains that songs accompanied by any of these instruments are usually personal, as they cover topics such as love, family, and relationships. Furthermore, the songs that were sung with the assistance of these instruments, were also about a reflection of the individual’s mental state. As such, the fact that both instruments have a very soft sound aided in that reflective process. 

However, there are key variations between these instruments. Uhadi is a single-string acoustic bow affiliated with the Xhosa tribe, whereas umakhoyane is a single-string acoustic bow affiliated with the Zulu tribe. In addition, umakhoyane possesses a bridge in the middle that uhadi does not. Furthermore, there is also a difference in the sound produced by the two instruments. “Uhadi produces one sound when it is played with the string openly without touching it; you can then get the second sound by pinching and releasing the string using the index finger and a thumb. However, umakhoyane produces two notes when playing the string on the upper and the lower level. The bridge in the middle of the string divides it into an upper part (low tone) and a lower part (high tone),” Dr Nkosi indicated.  

It is imperative to note that these instruments have adapted over time. In fact, they have been used in genres such as Jazz and contemporary Afro music. Therefore, Dr Nkosi believes that the preservation of these indigenous instruments is essential, as it keeps the African musical identity alive. 

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