De Jager is the MOM

Much can be said of the major importance of the driving mauls initiated by De Jager of the game and there was ample reason for him being named MOM and that says a lot about his game today,  One thing is very certain and that is if Matfield was in the team those mauls would just not have happened.  He is not physically strong enough to organise and participate in such mauls.
There were some problems in the team as well.  Jannie head that list of problem cases and when Pienaar came on and the Springboks managed to get a tighthead he was too slow to do anything with the ball,   There were way too many penalties given away by some players - Pieterse was bid in the relevant regard.
In discussions by the panel Taine Randell - the 1998 All Blacks captain was part of the panel,  He said the young lock combination is a major asset to the Springbok team and should not be changed willy-nilly.   
Not the best test I have ever seen - but at least we won and not bugger up like some of our players did in the Japan test.   The bad eggs then was not the player easily blamed by some o the members of this site - but the dead heads that was that day atrocious,   
        
  

 Mike the guy interviewing Meyer commented on how very good the Bok lock combo was. I am sorry to say mou8ntains of EGG have landed on the good Dr and wee matfiled groupies.
The attack was not as good as I had hoped but I think it was the game plan adopted and not showing too much.
Meyer simply cannot go back to the limp wee matfiled.

The key question is: 
would the Boks have scored a 4th try if Matfield was playing? What we do know is they didn't & Matfield wasn't so the logic is clear to all nimble brained fans

The Boks would definitely have scored 4 tries with Matfield there. His attacking flair was much missed in the backline, proven by our stagnant attack all night.

 Lood and Etzebeth were great yes. Don't see how there's egg on the face of the matfield fans though? Just because Lood played excellently now, it doesn't mean Matfield didnt play well against Samoa.It's a great situation, to have a selection headache like this.

 What utter crud matfiled is not remotely in the class of Lood. If pap matfiled had been playing we might have lost as we would have lost tight five domiantion.
Everyone was commenting on how good this lock combo is.
Enjoy the EGG Ag please I'm didly and all other matfiled groupies.

Matfield would not have been cleanly out jumped by Grey after we had a feed 5 metres out....there was your fourth try.

 Several nimble brained supporters on this thread I see

Just keeping things real. Lomp was ok ....Allende weak in defence....Kriel was uncertain and invisible.
The match was won by Pollard, Habana, JP, Etzebeth and Burger. Three of whom the Barking Dogs have written off many times.

Modern rugby dictates that locks have mobility and skills. That's just the way the game is. Lood is not very mobile or skillful, but against Scotland, fine. Just as in 2014. In a more demanding test I have my doubts.
Interesting how Michael has turned his attention to Pollard and JP now. Clutching at straws? Now we must drop our top try scorer in the WC? Can you tell us when and where those penalties occurred? What the net result was? Or did you read numbers on ESPN and fill in the blanks yourself again? 

 hahahahahaha every expert opinion disagrees with your take on Lood is way off.Just admit you have got it all wrong.

 So are you saying he wasn't out jumped by Grey and that we wouldn't have mauled over for a try?  

 Mallet is saying he would drop wee matfiled. His experience also is not needed.
Its game set and match. 

 So are you saying he was not out jumped by Grey in a scoring situation?

 Mozart
May I have the honour of reminding you of Matfield in the last ten minutes of the two tests against the AB's which in fact donated to the AB's 7 points   Same thing - but Matfield actually cost the Springboks 7 points - while in the case of  De Jager it may have resulted in coring of a try.  
Egg-face keep the egg coming or admit that with Matfield we would have lost us at least 15 points today because of lack of ability to participate in mauls.   ,   

Check your facts Pervert.

 I gave you the matches and the time frames.  So the egg keeps coming 

 But you were wrong....Matfield never lost the ball, the maul was just balked. In this case Grey took possession away. Check your facts.

"Everyone was commenting on how good this lock combo is."
Maybe if you actually read what I said, it would help Beeno. When have I once said they haven't played well? I said they were both excellent. But to praise them you don't have to bring down other play ers.