So much was said this week about the outcomes of the weekends games. We will argue about it forever and your view might just be influenced by our allegiance to a certain team. I read this article on Sport24 by Gary Boshoff. This article opened my eyes a bit, i was totally against the touch rugby the Lions played. Maybe i must rethink my view.

During this past weekend’s Super Rugby fixtures, two very distinct approaches to the new rule applications became evident.

One, displayed in the Lions v Chiefs and Bulls v Brumbies games showed a definite shift to a more attacking, ball-in-hand approach, the intention of which is to capitalise on the momentum or flow resulting from the increasing space and opportunity created by the new law applications.

The other, on display in the Stormers v Waratahs, Cheetahs v Sharks and Crusaders v Reds games, showed how disciplined defensive structures can still win you matches, and valuable ones at that. The Cheetahs and Stormers can testify to this.

So while opportunities to advance and score tries will present itself more often, quick turnovers will more often than not leave the attacking team vulnerable to lethal counter attacks. Three opportunistic tries by the Reds saw the Crusaders suffer their heaviest defeat in recent memory.

It is therefore imperative that teams find the right balance between attack and defence and it is here where we’ll be able to judge the tactical nous and innovative abilities of the 14 coaches on display in the tournament.

The Stormers were the best defensive team over the weekend, primarily through the intelligent utilisation of labour at the breakdown.

They very rarely committed more than two players to the tackle and resultant ruck, releasing defenders to spread out across the field.

This frustrated the Waratahs throughout the match and also allowed the Stormers to swamp ball carriers trying to breach their well organised defensive lines.

A disciplined defence was also the main reason why the Sharks suffered their second successive defeat in Durban. Poor handling did not help their cause as the match was riddled with handling errors on both sides, particularly the Sharks. They now have to travel Down Under for five tough games with a team that is playing with very little confidence – it will be a true test of character.

The pressure was clearly evident on the field where John Smit openly questioned referee Pro Legoete’s decisions and later stormed off the field after the final whistle, not turning up for the customary post-match television interview. New backline coach Hugh-Reece Edwards must be having visions of his earlier encounter with Super Rugby.

Renewed attempt

Meanwhile, an interesting twist in the Eastern Cape’s bid to acquire a Super Rugby franchise is the renewed attempt by the Southern Kings to be included in the 2011 Super 15 competition.

In a statement, reported in the weekend papers, the Kings’ CEO, Stephan Pretorius, allegedly argued that the inclusion of the Southern Kings into Super Rugby sooner rather than later makes perfect transformational sense.

He apparently also suggested that the way to do it was to amalgamate the Cheetahs and Lions franchises to create a space for the Kings.

What I found fascinating about this statement is Pretorius’s use of the “transformation argument”. I am delighted to see that he has become a champion of transformation overnight.

During his tenure as CEO of the Blue Bulls Company the sum total of his transformational effort was having an African theme and dance group at the Blue Bulls Awards function during his first year as CEO.

During the rest of his term he resisted genuine transformation of the franchise which in my view hardly makes him the person to take seriously when advancing a transformation agenda.

I shudder at the thought of Pretorius at the helm of the franchise that is supposed to embody the future of black rugby in South Africa – the more things change, the more they stay the same.