So Tokkie you slime under my shoe

Lets be nice Mozzzz

Sure - Vermeulen had a  good game and  surprisingly so did Snyman.   

It was terrible - all those tackles missed by De Allende - Am  was at a huge disadvantage as a result.

And then there was the  wonderful display by Louw and the Beast, while Kisthoff and Tomas du Toit was absolutely useless.      

Then also Mostert shined as a top class lock,

What a f#cked brain dead stooge you are.          

Sure - Vermeulen had a  good game and  surprisingly so did Snyman.   

It was terrible - all those tackles missed by De Allende - Am  was at a huge disadvantage as a result.

And then there was the  wonderful display by Louw and the Beast, while Kisthoff and Tomas du Toit was absolutely useless.      

Then also Mostert shined as a top class lock,

What a f#cked brain dead stooge you are.          

I find it hard to find a worse defensive 11 12 13 & 14. This win belongs to Faf,Willie & Vermeulen.  The altitude and yellow really helped.

And Faf Mike?

Can we agree that he's easily our best?

Liar - go to ESPN and see about the missed tackle that did not happen - dud  

Umm Mike...it did happen.

Pollard missed him first and then De Allende went in chest high instead of at the waist to Brown that was already slowed down by Pollard.

A criminal miss down to pathetic technique.

End of.

Haha snap Moz

Yes, both Pollard  and DdA fcked up there. As did our both our wings in the other Pom tries. Pity Moz want to pin it all on Damian...pot kettle jak over and over.  Bokke came back well 

Indeed Dyanti is responsible for some noobi sh stuff too.

But then, those guys also contributed.

Damien made only a couple of reasonable surges at the line.

Also, from memory, he wasn't involved in any of the tries.

Plum, I'm no DdA fan, but he wasn't that kak.

Draad, I thought he was 100% average and the only things that stood out were his missed tackle and a couple of advantage line gains.

He also took a couple of kick offs and held possession.

Nothing else comes to mind.

Dr Moz has unfortunately led many astray regarding Allende who had a really good game.

Nobody in this Bok side had a bad game. Coming back from 24-3 down was an amazing effort and credit needs to be given where it is due.

Mozart

As your are always a liar it is no use responding to your BS.

Plum

If you can one posting where I wrote anything negative about Faf please produce it.   Jusr ifnore that stinking c#nt Mozart

Jeezum crow your team stages a magnificent comeback victory and you guys are at each others throats ? Whats wrong with you guys ??

Mike is angry at the Boks winning because he predicted otherwise. For him being right is more important than the team's success.

True Wardad, .... the concern is however why were they dominated in the first 20. 

Given 50/50 possession our centres and wings would have continued being dominated. The only reasons we won were Faf's pace on the game & work rate, Willie's  pace and X factor and Vermeulen galvanizing the forwards.

We have a huge problem in needing to meet quotas & therefore gifting caps to players that can run or crash but can't tackle or follow a defensive pattern.

It's a win and I am thankful well done Rassie for getting the OS players back.

Yeah Mikey beandicks wee head will explode .

And everyone knows lady parts are pretty useful things.Essential even.Does wee Moz fit that category ?

Moz, you dissed a "seuntjie" predicrion of mine that does not exist. Please show me what you mean  I find your "seuntjie" references with the obvious "pervert" or "pedo" connotation very distasteful.  I don't mind you dissing players. You've got a good way of looking at the game, but you have your pet hates and bias too.

What about the flops you support - mostly during the years they should have been out of rugby.  Lets add those to your list as well:-

Fat Fransie,  Matfield - after his return from retirement, Alberts - the loosie that never was a loosie, Morne Steyn - the bench player of Stade Francais, Pienaar and a long list of others.

You see :flaws in players that your dislike and no flaws in the case of the players you like.   When the latter is pointed out to you - some lie is raised to try and cover up the flaws.

The moment you mention your pet hate players - the matter is clear.  You are clueless about rugby and definitely t rying to prescribe to others what they must think - especially to agree with your stupidity as well.   Good luck to you - some may yet fall for your constant lies about certain players.   I am not one of those.   .   .          

Sure - I did - because I saw some matches he played in for Toulon and was not at all impressive.    However, I had no problem with his performance yesterday/

However, why I write about players based on their performance - I do not invent lies to discredit them.   That I leave entirely to you.   

Moz, kindly bump the thread with my prediction.  As for the "seuntjie" thing...its just wrong on so many levels. I'm not a bachelor and I've got a bloody donkey for an avatar.

Mozart

The initial tackle count on ESPN was 9 tackles made - two missed.   That was adjusted later.   That entails a tackle every 4,5 minutes.   A good tackle count - but were they "process tackles" - remember that idiot term you invented to try and criticize players with high tackle counts.     Is that term only applicable to players you dislike fool?