As the Super Rugby competition gets toward the end, it is clear to see from performances last weekend, in some significant games, that attitude still can make a difference.

The Highlanders on Friday, in Invercargill, against the Chiefs, showed that performance is as much mental as anything else at this time of the year; it is human nature to have an eye on the end goal, but they have a lot of experience in their side now and they showed they were still fixed on the now and impressed in their win.

There were some dodgy calls in the game, and I felt the Chiefs were hard done by when Damian McKenzie was denied a try after he looked to have done everything right. The TMO was called into play to judge whether McKenzie had got downward pressure on the ball; the TMO had to slow the action right down to make a decision, but I think he got it wrong. Compare the decision with the action Hosea Gear had in forcing the ball at the other end of the field for a 22-metre kick, there was little difference between the two; I thought the TMO decision on McKenzie was harsh.

Talking of TMOs, I thought the tip-tackle ruling on Robbie Fruean in the Crusaders' game with the Hurricanes was also harsh; that decision also came from the TMO. I'm frustrated these rulings are being made when it was impossible for Fruean - and there have been other instances this year - to do anything else. All the power and strength you get as a player comes from the ground. Fruean wasn't connected to the ground when he made the tackle so he wasn't in control of the tackle; the TMO made his decision because the didn't understand the player couldn't have done anything else.

Justin Marshall's reaction in the commentary highlighted this point, and I believe it has reached the stage when experienced rugby players, who know what happens in these situations, should be in the room with the TMO and able to contribute to the decision by asking "Is there intent in what the player has done?". It is all very well adjudicating to the letter of the law, but what about the variables that come into play?

Back to Invercargill, the Highlanders are a really niggly team that pushes the boundaries; sometimes they get penalised, but more often than not they don't. They are prepared to come away by taking a risk. The Highlanders read the referee well on Friday as they learned quickly that they could lie on the ground and push the ball back; and so they got away with it.

I know a lot of teams now profile the referees in their pre-game planning, to see where the officials might have a particular interest in applying the laws; the Highlanders had certainly done their homework, and I know the Chiefs take a similar approach.

I thought the final scoreline flattered the Highlanders, but there was no taking anything away from their effort; and that was a great individual try scored by Waisake Naholo.

And so back to Nelson.

I haven't been a fan of the Crusaders playing Dan Carter at second five-eighth, as he is never going to give the side the sort of power that Ma'a Nonu does at 12 for the Hurricanes - and the All Blacks. And we saw in Nelson that Carter, in liaison with a centre like Fruean can create options - sometimes out of nothing - to give the side some go-forward. With Carter and Fruean in combination, all of a sudden the Crusaders looked something like the team of old and were much more dangerous. Colin Slade is a fine player, but he hasn't got the quality in that area that Carter has. And while Slade may be able to do what Carter can do in first phase play, there is no doubt that Carter is the best defensive 10 in the world.

I watched their game with the Hurricanes with no allegiance, just as a fan of the game, and the outcome was of no concern to me. However, I couldn't help but reflect on Stuart Lancaster's comments of last week that he wanted England to be the fittest team at the Rugby World Cup this year.

I watched the game in Nelson and noted how long scrums were taking, because these guys are getting a rest all the way through games. From the time the referee blows his whistle for a scrum, until the time the scrum is set, it is about one-and-a-half minutes to two minutes.

There's 45 seconds from the whistle when the players clean their boots, have a team talk, walk around a bit, and then start to present themselves to the referee. He then goes into his cadence calling the scrum, and it can be another half minute. It's all wrong and painfully slow. You can have a lineout, and it is all over in 30 seconds.

But I'm not advocating a law change; rather a change of attitude. And it is not a safety issue that requires extra time in formation. They just need to get on with it, and the sooner the better.