A very even game statistically

Two tries each.

Boks 253 metres/ Scotland 263 metres

Boks 51% territory/Scotland 49 %

Boks 57% of possession/ Scotland 43%….mostly that first 20 minutes

Boks 2 clean breaks/Scotland 3

Boks 20 defenders beaten/ Scotland 17

Boks  4 offloads/ Scotland 11.

…..and now the aspects which killed Scotland:

Boks 8 turnovers conceded/Scotland 14

Boks 9 penalties/Scotland 15

..   

Scotland lost this game because of very inadequate players at 12 and 14.

Because their tighthead was a disaster

Because South Africa is  now lethal at the breakdown

Because while some penalties were forced, many were simply silly.

You can't lose the penalty count to the Boks, but it's hard to stay on top of the ref calls. You just have to weather it like Australia and New Zealand did. Breakdown struggles is another no-no. I'll watch the game later and see what's what. 

You forgot the most important stat.

This is why you never understand the Boks Herr Draht, you ignore all the information. Selective hearing. 

No, I don't ignore the stats, I see it in the contex of the match...you seem to be ignoring the score board...talk about selectivity...

I assess the performance by analysing the performance; breaking the game down. Ende. 

LOL...it reminds me of ol' Snoekbek (Snor)

"We won on the field but not on the scoreboard"

A classic by Pieter amongst others.

"I assess the performance by analysing the performance; breaking the game down. Ende. "

No, you finecomb the stats and the matches to get something to convince us how crap Rassie's Bokke are...you are failing, not due to a lack of effort, but simply because the Bokke are much better than you rate them...much better...not perfect, but better than what they've been in years.

Those relying to heavily on stats often come unstuck. The Boks dominated the second half. 

I do hope this was not another joyless win for moz zzz, the Org and mampara power. 

"I do hope this was not another joyless win for mozzzz, the Org and mampara power."

Unfortunately it seems so though.

To be fair Moz did give them a little credit. 

I'll have to watch it again, but Hogg's first try came off a forward pass?

"To be fair Moz did give them a little credit. "

Ein-Auge too...he said Damien didn't stuff up the Mapimpi try.

"Those relying to heavily on stats often come unstuck" 

I have never relied on stats. I rely on film. I just covered both tries. Rather, it's a case of bringing it the film and watching the Plastiks scatter. It should be well known at this point that I rely on film and will always refer back to it. Talk about show learners!

Do you know who does come unstuck? The Plastiks. They really on hearsay, from whoever will agree with them. They never have anything else to bring to the table. Then they stamp their little feet when the facts come to light. I've already been told that film is a "gross fabrication of the truth". 

15-30

The end result was the result - which were far from even  and to write tri[ppe like the above is really meaningless.   

By the way Ki9ndergagten Imbecile - what you "saw" in games is vastly different from what actually happened and experts seeer in games.  Lunatic assumptions are not what p[eople want to  ber entertained with.  .  

Ja, it was even Maaik.

"No, you finecomb the stats and the matches to get something to convince us how crap Rassie's Bokke are...you are failing, not due to a lack of effort, but simply" 

Not quite Herr Draht. I lay everything on the table and simple call a spade a spade. The Plastiks are those who are selective. Sometimes one type of evidence is fact, other times it isn't. Sometimes video is irrefutable and other times it isn't. Picking and choosing. Wiese was poor until the facts said he was 98% on defence and with high metres per carry. Kwagga was useless until Josè elevated him into the squad. Then the narrative changes, even though Kwagga's contributions have been consistent all year. Damian has two or three runs into empty space and he is a hero. I see my thread on the two tries has scared off the Kak Pack. Not so easy to talketh said Kak when the evidence is laid bare. The Josè disciples shamble from one flimsy cluster of words to another, never really saying anything. What have you all put together? Nothing? No successful refutation, no successful defence of any one of your positions. Yep, the Kak Pack keep flushing themselves down the toilet. The natural order one would presume. 

Compares favorably with:

Nche 3 runs/0 metres

Nyakane 2runs/4metres

Marx 5 runs/3 metres

Kitshoff 4 runs/2 metres

Does that sum up their physicality?

I can see why you don’t trust numbers Dave, they confuse you.

The Boks that exist in their heads doesn't exist in reality. The Plastiks must be an LSD or dimethyltryptamine cult. 

Then you must be very disappointed in Lomp vs Wales ….9 runs for 7 metres. 

I’m also concerned about the scrums yesterday where we were stronger in the first 60 minutes with Mostert behind Nche, as opposed to Lomp behind Kitshoff in the second half. 

I know your theory is it was the whole scrum….but the ref awards the penalties and he gave 4 to Zander Fagerson the side Mostert was pushing. But let me guess in this unique case the lock doesn’t matter.

Watch the fool juggle the hot potato that is rugby fact. 

The plastic for brains Org and his echo wee mozzzz making fools of themselves again. 

Fancy trying to argue that this was an even contest. The Scots were blown away in the second half. 

Anyhow their lunacy does give rise to debate. But I would urge them to up their game. Try and understand the game and make reasonable comments. Right now they look completely unhinged. 

After this weekends matches will Boks return to the number 1 ranking. I expect this will happen. 

Not that this will stop our terrible twosome from lamenting the state if Bok rugby. 

Mostert has not eben a factor as a starting lock from 2019 when eh was dropped because of serious open0-field tackle deficiency.   He si also very ineffective in line-outs and in the tight phases of the game.   He was then used at 7 when Du Toit was not available - but is at best a bench selection and even that is debatable.    He as on the bench  against Wales and did squat in the game - even though he as on the field for 20 minutes/    

The problem with Mostert is that he lacks the physicality needed in Tight 5 play and his poor open field  defense record reduce his usability as a  lo0ose forward.     I am afraid that prejudice  by sit members are really not the norm  for team selection  and ratings by experts.    Fact is the rudimentary  stats they sue on site is not takn into account anyway - the experts analyzing games have much more info of a detailed nature in respect ofe ach player.   and  that determine whether a player was successful or not,   

Incidentally the  detailed info to be sued has been available in the period when Meyer and Coetzee was coaching the Springboks - but was never use by them when it came to performance evaluation.             

Mostert is more physical than Limp. Limp goes splat in contact. A thud that is stopped in its tracks. RG and van Rensburg are ahead of him, but he no bad thing at lock. As the stats show, he gives you good production. At 7, he is a vast improvement on the sloppy PTSD. Mostert is a big game performer who delivers. That's the difference. Limp and PTSD need to be carried. 

Limp has never in his life breached the gainline "every time". He goes sideways, backwards or thuds on the spot with zero gain. Not only that, he has shockingly poor skills. Basic handling skills are not there. He is heavy not strong, slow and passive. Only on his debut against Scotland in 2014 was he useful to us. Never again. Limp is a D- Bok, a little better than PTSD and Damian.