As this season's competition went to the last match of the last 32 on Sunday afternoon, most football followers were beginning to think that this edition had no surprises, that was until Milford pulled a rabbit out of the hat, claiming the scalp of the mighty Kaizer Chiefs via a penalty shootout after finishing goalless in both regulation and extra time.

For neutral football lovers, such upsets are what makes the Nedbank Cup exciting, it would even be more exciting if more underdogs could cause similar upsets.

This competition gives 16 teams from lower divisions an opportunity to be instant heroes.

The question may be, why are we not seeing more giant-killers?

1.Does this mean that the gap between PSL and lower divisions quality of football has become wider?

2.Are lower division coaches less knowledgeable now or have professional coaches widened the gap?

Maybe in order for us to find the answers, we need to look at the evolution of the beautiful game.

Historically, teams from lower divisions would show respect when playing against their counterparts from higher divisions, however, coaches like Pep Guardiola have introduced possession-based attacking football which is universally admired.

All the up-and-coming coaches nowadays try to emulate Guardiola.

Looking at many teams from lower divisions, they try to display the qualities of Guardiola's teams, i.e:
1.High press

2.Build-up play from the back

3.High ball retention

4.Ball playing goalkeeper

Even when executed well, high press is a relatively high-risk strategy that requires the participation of the entire team, who must press in sync with one another and adopt a high defensive line at all times.

Milford did not fall into this trap, they approached the match against Kaizer Chiefs, showing a lot of respect towards their PSL counterparts, allowing them to build up play from the back.

They did not press them high up the pitch, instead they applied mid to low block.

The system where a team sits in a low or medium block that's compact and minimises space centrally and in behind, allowing the opposition to have the ball and wait for players to move out of position, before applying a press, winning the ball and launching an attack into space has been called 'anti-football' by its detractors.

It was Jose Mourinho at Porto who revolutionised the notion of defending in a mid/low block and counter-attacking football.

He transformed this into an aggressive tactic in which his teams sought to control space, while deploying a quick counter-attack after regaining possession and were very good in transition from defensive to the attacking phase.

While this became a dominant tactic that subsequently underpinned the relative success of Leicester City and Diego Simeone's Atletico Madrid, the nature of the game has subsequently changed markedly.

In this season's edition of the Nedbank Cup, we have seen some teams from lower divisions pressing their elite opponents in a very uncoordinated manner high up the pitch, leaving lots of spaces in the middle and at the back.

As a football observer, one wonders whether:

1.The young coaches have developed the courage of a warthogs? Or

2.Are they worried about their reputation if they change the style to counter the strengths of the opposition?

In 2018, the then Chelsea manager Antonio Conte showed respect towards Manchester City and set up his team to play at low block.

He defended his negative approach, saying to play open football against Guardiola's side was to risk heavy defeat.

"I am not so stupid to play against Manchester City open and to lose 3-0 or 4-0," Conte told reporters.

If I remember well, two days ago, Arsenal played twice against them and then you criticised Arsene Wenger because they concede three goals in only 30 minutes.

Hopefully, in the last 16 we are going to see more "giant-killers" emerge.