Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 October 2024 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Francois van Vuuren, iFlair
UFS the 2024 Varsity Netball Champions
In a high-stakes showdown, the Kovsie netball team secured its fifth Varsity Netball title, edging out the University of Johannesburg (UJ) with a final score of 58-55.

After another nail-biting game in the 2024 Varsity Netball Tournament finals, Kovsies beat the University of Johannesburg (UJ) 58-55 at the Callie Human Centre on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) on 7 October 2024, earning them the title of 2024 Varsity Netball champions.

In an electrifying atmosphere – with strong support from fans in the stands – the Kovsie team, captained by Refiloe Nketsa, delivered a stellar performance, securing their fifth title. The game was tied 47-47 at full time and went into extra time, showcasing the team’s will and determination to win.

“Congratulations to our netball team for its fantastic performance not only during the final, but also throughout the tournament. The final was an amazing display of resilience, and we are proud of what the team achieved. I salute our champions on behalf of the entire university community. Under the leadership of the head coach Burta de Kock, the rest of the coaching staff, and captain Nketsa, the team worked hard, and their courage and commitment paid off,” said Prof Anthea Rhoda, acting Vice-Chancellor and Principal of the UFS.

“We would also like to acknowledge and thank the staff of KovsieSport under the leadership of Jerry Laka, Director of KovsieSport, for their significant contribution to the success of the team,” added Prof Rhoda.

Playing with heart and tenacity

Although the UFS started as favourites – having won the title in 2013, 2014, 2018, and 2021 – UJ played with heart and tenacity, fighting fiercely to claim the win. Both teams pushed their limits, with Kovsies leading by two points in the first few minutes. The score at the end of the first quarter was a close 13-12 in favour of the UFS.

In the second quarter, UJ fought back to close the gap, but Kovsies pulled ahead, leading by three points. They ended the quarter with Kovsies at 23 and UJ at 21. The third quarter saw the teams neck and neck, ending 35-34 in Kovsies’ favour. UJ briefly took the lead in the fourth quarter, but Kovsies rallied, reclaiming advantage and breaking through a tie of 47-47 to secure a victory of 58-55 in extra time.

Supporting the team from the side was head coach De Kock, Spar Proteas captain Khanyisa Chawane, Proteas vice-captain Karla Pretorius, team manager Ané Retief – who is part of the Protea squad that will represent South Africa at the Fast5 World Series in New Zealand in November, Sikholiwe Mdletshe, analysing coach, and Jason Carlisle, conditioning coach.

Coach De Kock, reflecting on the UFS team’s victory in the Varsity Netball finals, said, "We are very excited and grateful for God’s blessings and grace. We have an incredible group of players who are fully committed to the system. They understood their responsibilities on the court, and it was amazing to see that through. The players are also in top physical condition. We have a support framework within KovsieNetball, with everyone playing a role in helping the players succeed." She is also grateful to KovsieSport and the UFS for their hard work in preparing the venue and ensuring that the finals were a success.

‘Our players stood together’

De Kock attributed the team’s success to the unity they displayed on the court. "No player panicked when we lost the ball. Our players simply stood together and regained possession. We’re grateful for the incredible character the players demonstrated tonight."

With Kovsies claiming the title, the UFS this year reigns as Varsity Netball as well as Varsity Cup rugby champions. In April, the UFS Shimlas beat the UCT Ikeys 45-42 in the final on Shimla Park in Bloemfontein.

• Player of the Match: Refiloe Nketsa (UFS Kovsies captain)
• FNB Player of the Tournament: Rolene Streutker (UFS Kovsies)
• The team that played in the finals are: Liamé de Lange, Demi-Leigh de Jager, Megan Erasmus, Xandri Fourie, Elri Groenewald, Reratilwe Ke-Morena Letsoalo, Asanele Malgas, Owami Mohuli, Refiloe Nketsa, Rolene Streutker, Charné van Vuuren, Karla Victor.

News Archive

Media: Sunday Times
2006-05-20

Sunday Times, 4 June 2006

True leadership may mean admitting disunity
 

In this edited extract from the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State, Professor Njabulo S Ndebele explores the leadership challenges facing South Africa

RECENT events have created a sense that we are undergoing a serious crisis of leadership in our new democracy. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and committed South Africans, across class, racial and cultural spectrums, confess to feeling uncertain and vulnerable as never before since 1994.

When indomitable optimists confess to having a sense of things unhinging, the misery of anxiety spreads. We have the sense that events are spiralling out of control and that no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a definitive handle on things.

There can be nothing more debilitating than a generalised and undefined sense of anxiety in the body politic. It breeds conspiracies and fear.

There is an impression that a very complex society has developed, in the last few years, a rather simple, centralised governance mechanism in the hope that delivery can be better and more quickly driven. The complexity of governance then gets located within a single structure of authority rather than in the devolved structures envisaged in the Constitution, which should interact with one another continuously, and in response to their specific settings, to achieve defined goals. Collapse in a single structure of authority, because there is no robust backup, can be catastrophic.

The autonomy of devolved structures presents itself as an impediment only when visionary cohesion collapses. Where such cohesion is strong, the impediment is only illusory, particularly when it encourages healthy competition, for example, among the provinces, or where a province develops a character that is not necessarily autonomous politically but rather distinctive and a special source of regional pride. Such competition brings vibrancy to the country. It does not necessarily challenge the centre.

Devolved autonomy is vital in the interests of sustainable governance. The failure of various structures to actualise their constitutionally defined roles should not be attributed to the failure of the prescribed governance mechanism. It is too early to say that what we have has not worked. The only viable corrective will be in our ability to be robust in identifying the problems and dealing with them concertedly.

We have never had social cohesion in South Africa — certainly not since the Natives’ Land Act of 1913. What we definitely have had over the decades is a mobilising vision. Could it be that the mobilising vision, mistaken for social cohesion, is cracking under the weight of the reality and extent of social reconstruction, and that the legitimate framework for debating these problems is collapsing? If that is so, are we witnessing a cumulative failure of leadership?

I am making a descriptive rather than an evaluative inquiry. I do not believe that there is any single entity to be blamed. It is simply that we may be a country in search of another line of approach. What will it be?

I would like to suggest two avenues of approach — an inclusive model and a counter-intuitive model of leadership.

In an inclusive approach, leadership is exercised not only by those who have been put in some position of power to steer an organisation or institution. Leadership is what all of us do when we express, sincerely, our deepest feelings and thoughts; when we do our work, whatever it is, with passion and integrity.

Counter-intuitive leadership lies in the ability of leaders to read a problematic situation, assess probable outcomes and then recognise that those outcomes will only compound the problem. Genuine leadership, in this sense, requires going against probability in seeking unexpected outcomes. That’s what happened when we avoided a civil war and ended up with an “unexpected” democracy.

Right now, we may very well hear desperate calls for unity, when the counter-intuitive imperative would be to acknowledge disunity. A declaration of unity where it manifestly does not appear to exist will fail to reassure.

Many within the “broad alliance” might have the view that the mobilising vision of old may have transformed into a strategy of executive steering with a disposition towards an expectation of compliance. No matter how compelling the reasons for that tendency, it may be seen as part of a cumulative process in which popular notions of democratic governance are apparently undermined and devalued; and where public uncertainty in the midst of seeming crisis induces fear which could freeze public thinking at a time when more voices ought to be heard.

Could it be that part of the problem is that we are unable to deal with the notion of opposition? We are horrified that any of us could be seen to have become “the opposition”. The word has been demonised. In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there is no longer a single, overwhelmingly dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of history. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than seek to prevent it. We see here once more the essential creativity of the counter-intuitive imperative.

This is the formidable challenge of a popular post-apartheid political movement. Can it conceptually anticipate a future when it is no longer overwhelmingly in control, in the form in which it is currently, and resist, counter-intuitively, the temptation to prevent such an eventuality? Successfully resisting such an option would enable its current vision and its ultimate legacy to our country to manifest in different articulations, which then contend for social influence. In this way, the vision never really dies; it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. Consider the metaphor of flying ants replicating the ant community by establishing new ones.

We may certainly experience the meaning of comradeship differently, where we will now have “comrades on the other side”.

Any political movement that imagines itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few movements have survived those defining moments when they should have been more elastic, and that because they were not, did not live to see the next day.

I believe we may have reached a moment not fundamentally different from the sobering, yet uplifting and vision-making, nation-building realities that led to Kempton Park in the early ’90s. The difference between then and now is that the black majority is not facing white compatriots across the negotiating table. Rather, it is facing itself: perhaps really for the first time since 1994. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed leading up to the adoption or our Constitution?

This is not a time for repeating old platitudes. It is the time, once more, for vision.

In the total scheme of things, the outcome could be as disastrous as it could be formative and uplifting, setting in place the conditions for a true renaissance that could be sustained for generations to come.

Ndebele is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town and author of the novel The Cry of Winnie Mandela

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