Article after article predicting a Bok win over Wales....

....I myself put it a no more than 50/50 with the selected team. Wales have played the tougher matches in the WC, and had a very good chance to beat Oz. They have better centres, at least parity in the half backs and a better back row. I make the comment on the back row because Vermeulen to me is still not firing and Warburton is the best fetcher in the contest.
An edge we would have had at front row is negated by selecting Malherbe.
Crucially Biggar has been a better kicker than Pollard so far, although last week under pressure he wasn't perfect.
So what gives us the divine right of victory....our locks? Etzebeth and Lomp are good but the Bargies had no problem with them. Wales have experienced locks who have faced the best in the game. They wont be intimidated.
This is a big pressure game and weaknesses rather than strengths could determine the outcome. The Bok weaknesses are there....at centre and at tighthead, on the bench with Lambie and Stephanie  and in the breakdown. Much will hinge on whether Wales can exploit these opportunities.
For the Boks Pollard has to make his kicks and we have to apply enough general pressure to get penalties which can set up our maul. Habana and JP will be key as they have been ever since Japan.
These teams are desperately close and WC knockouts are a leveler in any case. Fasten your seatbelts..

Only two usable players on that bench in Alberts and Strauss. Serf is a maybe, because last year the Welsh ate him up at 12. Trevor is again a maybe. 
And the sad part is we don't have an assured kicker anywhere in sight. Morné on the bench would have been a safety net. No Jannie at all is another worry. Mal has not been scrumming well. Right across the board Wales have physicality where it count most. The only players in our backline who offer that physicality are Habana, JP and Pollard. A frightening prospect. 
I will keep my prediction, but it is going to be a tough fight right to the end. 

Why is Trevor a maybe? Everything he's done this WC, and even before for the boks has been solid, maybe not a world beater but I can't recall a time when he's let us down. 

Not a fan of Piennar really, but Paige has played only a few minutes for the Boks, albeit very decent minutes. 

I think Lambie gets a bad rap from some on here, the same way Victor does. Lambie is not the world beater that the media billed him up to be, but he's solid, his passing, game management are solid without being spectacular. He's not the best goal-kicker BUT he has converted the most important and most pressure-filled penalty of his career against the Boks greatest foes. He's not a beast on defence, but he's not the flimsy lad some make him out to be, he misses tackles at times but he's not rubbish. Maybe Morne should have been picked but Meyer clearly felt that Lambie earned the bench spot. 

Serfontein is okay....not much more, not much less

Du Toit is an odd one as I firmly believe he'll go on to have a great career but having a guy who's hardly played rugby for ages on the bench in a world cup quarter final is very nerve-wrecking but Matfield is injured and we weren't left with any choice.
Jannie, good to have on the bench, experienced. 

Strauss, top drawer. 

Alberts, if he;s on his game he's a weapon but it's been a while since we've seen the Alberts of old, let's hope he brings it in this game, a big game player. 

 Lamebie hit a penalty against against NZ. He was so afraid that not once did he even look up. It was a 50/50 thing, but he blew a drop goal around the 22m line earlier and was run over later for a NZ breakout. No aspect of his game is adequate. He is slow, passive, error-strewn, has a very weak pass of both hands, hasn't landed one impactful tackle in any of his test at 10, cannot make decisions and has a pop gun boot. What is there for me to like? His test career has been an abject failure, and now we enter the most important test since the Wallaby showdown in 2011 without Morne... for this thing? It's a diagrace. The same substandard wretch that brought the greatest shame to Bok rugby against Japan. But he a tragic string of performances before that. Why is he being rewarded? And Pollard got booed off the field, you could see in Lamebies eyes how much he bought into the hype. He truly believes he is good enough because at no point in his career has he ever been held into account for anything. He blew our WC in 2011 and got away with it. He wrecked our EOYT alongside his Guppy cohort and came away a hero. It is truly sickening! It is a dark day when I can tell you that Watson deserved his 10 caps more than Lamebie has earned any of his. 
I liked what I saw in Paige but he has done nothing of note yet. And this will be the biggest game of his career, nothing will have come close to it to date. 
Trevor, I like him, but it's still a maybe. He hasn't done much wrong but he hasn't done anything extraordinary either. He looks a good prospect but can we guarantee he is up for this? I hope so, hence maybe. 
Du Toit. I don't see the slightest mark of greatness in him. Eben and Lood will be our starting locks for years unless injury gets in the way of it or a better player comes along. Du Toit stands no chance. Though I am neglecting to mention that the media loves Du Toit. And just like Lamebie, they can keep a player in the Bok setup for many years. That alone is good enough for 50 free caps. 

Very unfair on Lambie, in my opinion. I think he's a solid player to have in the team, I certainly won't be losing any sleep because he's on the bench. Obviously you're entitled to have your opinion but it doesn't seem like I'll change your mind, so probably best to agree to disagree. Although I think 'Pollard got booed off the field, you could see in Lamebies eyes how much he bought into the hype.' is harsh because you're seeing what you want to from Lambies facial expression there because you're not a fan of him. Regardless of what you think of him as a player, I very much doubt he'd be please his teammate didn't have the best game. 

And yeah, agreed on Paige. Interested to see more of him, but I understand it probably won't be at this World Cup.

The thing is, Trevor doesn't hav e to do anything spectacular, he makes no mistakes, solid scrumming and he's even a rea sonable fetcher so in my opinion a nice bench prop to have. We'll probably see a lot more of Kitshoff/Trevor after the WC if beast gets phased out.

Again, agree to disagree on Du Toit, I think he;ll go on to be very good. Currently maybe he's not ready so I understand the nervousness on some people but he'll go on to be a good player.

 Doesn't matter much if Stephanie goes on to be a good player, but isn't ready now. This is the W C, it's the future that matters until there is another one 4 years from now. He is a sentimental choice and a silly one.

 If you read up I've said that 'having a guy who's hardly played rugby for ages on the bench in a world cup quarter final is very nerve-wrecking', I would have had Matfield on the bench, but he's injured so we were left with no option. 

The only thing Meyer could have done was call in a replacement but that would have meant sending Matifeld away even if we made it to the semis or finals, which wouldn't have been good.

 Deddy, when Lamebie plays, the opposition concentrate on him. It's been that way since 2011 when NZ ripped his heart out for a record win. What has this kid really done? Nothing. He had try in a Tin Cup final and has been riding that for years. He is at best our 7th option at 10, maybe less then that. At fullback his prospects look better and so too his contributions. But he will never be world class anywhere because he is a process player. Someone without natural talent or athleticism. Against Wales his deep and wonky alignment and slow service will make our backs suffer. The Welsh line advance very quickly and we cannot entertain the thought of a 10-12 who cannot tackle or pass. We just have to pray Damian holds up and Pollard makes it through the full 80.

Fox, I don't think he's World Class or will be World Class, I've said I think that the Boks and Shark hype machine built him up massively. But I just think he's solid. Like I've said, I probably won't change your mind, and you're entitled to your opinion so it's all cool. 

Out of interest who are the 6 other Fly Halfs you'd have ahead of him?

 Frans, Boshoff, Morne, Jantjies, Ebersohn, Swiel, Pietersen, Willie, Bosman, Potgieter. I'd play all those before Lamebie.
At 15 he is more useful however and would be in my group of 3.

 Frans, Morne, Jantjies I see why, rest haven't shown me that yet but Swiel has the potential, Joe Pietersen looks good too. 

Haven't seen much of Ebersohn. 

Willie at 10 is interesting, I've not seen him at flyhalf before but it's almost criminal having someone as talented as him with the little involvement he has in the game at times, so is he good at 10? 

 This is again a case of dribbling idiocy and I for one say that thwhole assessment of players is a sham.   All because their Holy Cows (Morne Steyn, Matfield and Jannie) are  not in the team and then Meyer accrding to them  made the mistake of not including two other Holy Cows (Francois Steyn and Juan de Jongh) in the WC squad at all.  .   
What happened over the past year in tests between SA and Wales and the tests involving countries both countries have not been reviewed at all.   Last week Mozart gave the Springboks a 10 point win as the outcome - this week it is sudenly down to 50:50.
This is because Malherbe and  De Jager is selected because they were BETTER performers than there favourites and for the rest based on total misrepresentations as to the performances of individual players which they demonize are concerned.
If Matfield and Jannie did play - then I would have given the Springbok team NO chance of beating Wales - now I five them a chance of beating Wales by 15 points.   This kind of sick enmity against performing players basially based on misrepresentations and even outright lies is sickening and I for one am going to remind these drama queens and prima donnas of this thread after the game on Saturday.            

H e certainly can't be worse. He is a running threat, can play flat, can pass and kick with a variety of options. He has the base materials for a 10. Likewise the other options. They are all more usable. If Goosen wasn't made of glass and if he didn't have the strength of a Barbie doll, I'd have had him in there too.

Dumb Mike, the ten point edge was for the Boks over Scotland. Man you are one thick hombre. In my WC finals prediction, I picked the Boks over Wales....but it's very close. The selections make it even closer.  

 If Jannie and Matfield were playing/starting  my pick would have gone to Wales by 12 points because we cannot play Wales with a disfunctional Tight 5 (Matfield) and Jannie has both scrumming and disciplinary problems - he had it all year this year as well.  
If you said the Boks by 10 points in the Scotland game - you really beat all of us in making the most inaccurate of forecasts - 80% out on point difference.  
So what was your forecast - what do you mean by very close?   How many points difference?       

A twenty seven point swing because of Victor and Jannie? 

Funny stuff from the liar who chose Samoa to beat the Boks.  

 Dunderheads
I cry my heart out,  Lets look at the test situation of dear Victor - a real disaster.  Losses in 6 of the 12 tests he actually played in  is a disastrous record.   The real reason for most of those losses were not what you claim it to be - but a malfunctioning Tight 5 which Victor all on his own turned into a Tight 4.
The fact that you two fail to realize is that the center pairing was not the reason why we lost tests this year.   It has to do with what happened in the rest of the play,   You may dream about the fact that the nw center pairing - playing there first test together in the RV this year was to blame for the losses this year - so lets look at the situation in perspective:-
Losses playing together as a pair  -  2Losses split up                          -  2Wins together                           -  3Wins split up                             -  1    
The above indicate that as a pair Kriel and De Allende won more than they lost - when they were split up the record was worse.   
You two do not know anything about center playing - your description of what is required from backline players is totally distorted.   For  that reason you totally disregarded attacking play by the centers and concentrate only on defense  You blame the pairing for the loss against Australia - which was utter tripe because in reality the wheels went off elsewhere - specifically in forward play.
I have no problem with them in the game on Saturday - neither have most thinking people - my problem and those of others were with the forwards - more specifically with Matfield and Jannie du Plessis.   They really were matchlosers par excellence.  
Without those two we have a much-strengthened functional Tight 5 and in the centers we have an effective attacking force.  Du Preez was from a tactical point of view vastly superior to Pienaar in the RC and Japan game.
So from a projected 10 points loss - the turnaround to a 15 projected win is entirely logical.  
Mozart said I projected a loss to Samoa and I did - but that loss was due to the trance performance by the forwards against Japan and the duds who played in that game being involved in the subsequent Samoa game.  Apparently Meyer put a rocket under their backsides and some of them reacted positively - while the rest fell by the wayside.  
After the Japanese disaster you have the cheek to come up with the BS you normally write on this site - so you have lost all credibility about your so-called evaluation of rugby players.                               

     

 Dr Mozzz should by now realise how hopelessly wrong he and Fox have been re selections.The widespread optimism against a tough welsh outfit is because Meyer is picking the best from his squad. Everyone but Dr Mozzz. Fox and that other luminary cerudunce windpomp understand this.THis is the best we have form the squad selected. If we lose its because we are not good enough or because of having another bent ref in charge. Not because of selectionsWith regard to refs at least we don't have Poite! Also we would definitely have no chance if a bent OZ or nz ref had officiated. With Barnes we at least can hope for a fair deal. I have found English refs to be pretty good.
What a pity we still get some oaks lambasting fine young players like Steph (Who is miles better than pap matfiled) Serfontein and Lambie!I close by noting the lack of confidence Dr Moz is showing. As he said a little while back one has tohave an escape route. Well when you say the match is 50/50 you pretty much have got your escape route! Bwahahahahahahahaha
Lots of EGG landed on the threesome when we lost to Japan. Most of the board were not happy with the team selected except for the weird threesome!. Once Meyer made the necessary changes we saw things would be okay and they were.
Wales is a tough nut and a good test for the okes.  Expect a huge Bok onslaught. The have the forwards to put the Welsh to the sword. We shall see how it goes.Boks by at least 10

 "I cry my heart out,  Lets look at the test situation of dear Victor - a real disaster.  Losses in 6 of the 12 tests he actually played in  is a disastrous record.   The real reason for most of those losses were not what you claim it to be - but a malfunctioning Tight 5 which Victor all on his own turned into a Tight 4."

Then please explain this:
Lood de Jager's win ratio against New Zealand, Australia and Japan is 0%

Part of the extreme unlikely losses for the Springboks against Argentina and JAPAN this year...

Losses in 7 out of the last 12 tests he played in...

Losses in 3 out of his last 5 starts... Which by the way, includes Argentina and Japan...

 RE Beeno, SA refs are more bent then OZ and NZ. I like how you specifically went NZ and Aussie refs, not refs I general lol seriously. SA teams and players have been using illegal scrimmaging tactics for years, but you don't see NZ or even Oz fans bitching about it like you always consistently do. Just because a ref makes a controversial call, does not mean the wrong call was made. As for the game if the Boks cant beat Wales, they don't deserve to progress, anymore then they did last time, when you were outplayed by the aussies.

 So if the ref allows Pocock to kick the ball back through the ruck from an offside position and Oz score from the resulting phase that doesn't matter in a low scoring game? What a prat.

Let me help you out 3IQ, this is how Australia "dominated" the Boks.

Possession: 67% BoksTerritory: 75% BoksDefenders Beaten: 13 Boks, 5 AusOffloads: 17 Boks, 5 AusLineouts Lost: 0 Boks, 5 AusScrums Lost: 0 Boks, 1 Aus
Astoundingly dominant. 
But here's the interesting part. Virtually everytime the Boks were in the red zone Australia killed the ball or the ref mysteriously blew against the Boks for a turnover count of 24 to the Boks and 11 for Australia. It us unheard of for a team to be so much on top physically and not having ascendancy at the breakdown. What happened to backing the attacking team? It was a horror show and one so bad that Bryce retired! 

To the OP, I think you nailed the issues:
Herd mentality is often wrong. I preferred it right after the Japan game when everyone was writing us off. Much easier to be the 'dog in the game - Boks always perform better with backs against the wall. 
Given the current health and form, I do think we have our best possible team out there although I think Malherbe will have a very short leash if things start going south in the scrums.
Three deciding factors for me:
1) 10-12-13 defense. They will attack us through their backline2) Pollard's goal kicking3) Boks ability to execute clean lineouts and drive - our most reliable source of scoring if we're going to be honest. Will it matter that there is no Matfield?
Don't kid ourselves - this will be a tight game. We haven't faced anything like the quality of Wales who played Australia close when most were predicting they didn't have a chance after the injuries they suffered. 
Confident we win this but we have to be on our game. No willy nilly throwing it wide. Glad we're not facing Aus or NZ right now - we need a game like this first.

The trooth Fairy
Your whole scenario is really crap and factually wrong as well.  De Jager started in the following tests only:-
Scotland    -    2014           -   winArgentina   -    2014    (2)   -   won bothAB's          -    2015     (1)  -   lossArgentina   -    2015    (1)   -   lossJapan        -    2015           -   lossScotland    -    2015           -   winUSA          -    2015           -   win
In other words De Jager started in 8 games and the Springboks won 5 of them.  You cannot count bench selections as part of the process since that distort the whole issue - by then the game was in some cases already lost.
Incidentally De Jager never started in a single game against Australia.
The issue here is not only the number of matches played - also the quality of performances.    In the 8 tests started since June 2014 when he made his debit for the Springboks - he constantly performed better than Matfield and even was MOM in one of the matches.  He scored 4 tries in that period - Matfield zero.
Statistically he was twice the player Matfield was and he was a force in Tight 5 play - where Matfield went AWOL. 
MATFIELD WAS A DISASTER FOR THE SPRINGBOKS OVER THE PAST 16 MONTHS - A PLAYER WHO SHOULD NE VER HAVE COME BACK FROM RETIREMENT.       
  

Lood was poor against Argentina last year. Just because he has a W in the column, doesn't mean he was the reason why. 

 Matfield - what a bloody joke - he was seriously deficient in Tight 5 play in every test he played in.  He was useless in ball carries in traffic - he made weak tackles - he was not in evidence in ball protection and recovery.   So what did he actually produce that take him above the bad test scenario?
Useless as a lock and that is a fact.   When everything is said you are the clueless one and a bad distorter of facts!!!   I would not call it lies - rather fraudulent.        

 Oh sure Argentina 1...where were slaughtered
4LEben Etzebeth5LLood de Jager

 Argentina 2 where we dominated....spot the difference
4LEben Etzebeth5LVictor Matfield (c)

 Playing against the Argentinian B team and this one is happy - over the moon.
So why not make prediuction forecxast for the quarterfinals and out thinking members have already made predictions - you and DF are too cowardly to do so.  

I was the first to do so!
Big mouth, little brain, lots of egg'eth rain again.

 DF
There is a thread dedicated to predictions - do it there as well, please.  Must have missed it - I do not read some of your repetitive garbage - so please provide it under the appropriate thread.     

Saff;  but his current escapade has tarnished his status in a big way.

Too  true  like John Smit who overstayed

Nonsense Chabal....Victor  has played well in every game this year. He was a shoo in for the rest of the WC after the Samoa game. So how can an injury tarnish a players reputation?

 Mozart
Keep on pretending Matfield played well in every game.  He was missing from the Tight 5 - an essential as a lock - so how well did he play?   He started against Australia - did squat and when replaced De Jager did three times better than Matfield.  He was absolute Sh!t against Japan - was a major part of the reason we lost in that game.  

Pervert  if I want an opinion, I won't ask  a proven numerical illiterate....tell it to the fools who listen to you.

 Then keep on spouting BS - it is becoming of you.

Yep we beat the Argie B side away
Seb, yep I used to have a high regard for Matfield but sadly I will remember him for the liability he has been to Bok rugby since his return.....the youngsters have embarrassed him and shown him up in a big way.....look no further than Lood
He has been utterly useless, unless you want an old man who seems to model himself on a centre these days playing as your lock. Hell our inside centre is heavier than him.