Don't bowl a no ball

 First of all - the selection of starting teams in this series was a joke in bad taste.    They started off with the poor bowling attack nd then got to selection of a team with four bowlers and select Behardien to make up th 5th bowler together with De Villiers.  The last ODI I left out Steyn and ened up with a totally inadeuat bowling attack.   
On the batting side Amla - even with 102 runs in one ODI ended up with a batting averga of 31 in 5 ODI's In other words he made 52 runs in the other 4 ODI's combined. Faf du Plessis - another key batter ended up wih a batting average of 19 in the fhe 5 ODI's played.   De Kock started off badly - but ended up making th highest score of any SA Batter in  any of the five ODI innings.
The only SA batterthat was consistently good was De Villiers making three half centuries out of 4 innings played.   
Abelow par performance showing serious defects outside of our top three bowlers and serious inocnsistency in performance by our batters.   
De Kock must grow up and learn - he was given out and in th lats ODI when he did not touch the ball with either the bat - nor the glove.  Should have asked for a review - but did not - and he actually was not out - effectively giving himself out by walking.  
Not a good series by virtually all SA players - bar De Villiers - who had a cracked rib and could not playin the last ODI.   

De Kock made some lovely strokes today, but had huge luck as well.....those two Chinese cuts in the first over and at least three miscues that could easily have been caught. With the gap he presents between bat and pad he looks more like a good number five. He is living off his eye and his reflexes.

 Mozart
Your problem is that you do not want to know about the overall situation and that is a fact.  Your ifs and buts leave nothing but a serious defect in your writing on this Board. Because De Kock had a lucky survival on his furst shot - that was it in your mind.
However, that is not the issue - the issue remains what was the performances like of the top batters in the team - that should have done better for the Proteas:-
I list them from the highest average to the lowest:-
De Villiers     80 + 48 + 52 +  91          =   271  -   Average   67,8De Kock         2  + 10 + 47 + 18 + 107  =  184  -   Average   36,8Amla             8 +  4  + 102 +  17 + 18  =  149  -   Average   29,8Rossouw       30 + 2 + 51                     =   83  -   Average    27,7Miller           65 + 22 + 3 + 45 + 2        = 138  -   Average    27,6Behardien      20 + 0  + 22 + 2 + 63      =  117 -   Average   23,4Du Plessis      31 + 19 + 17 + 29 + 2     =    97 -    Average   19,4
Looking at the above stats -
*   De Villiers were outstanding/brilliant*   De Kock was average - acceptable*   the rest of the upper and middle order batters were below par;*   Du Plessis was poor.
The situation basiclly is that -
*   Amla was below par in 4 ODI's and only 1 was outstanding;*   Rossouw played only in 3 and was below par in 1,  above average in 1 and good in the other 1;*    Miller was below par in 3 ODI's, above averae in 1 and good in the other 1;*   Behardin was below par in 4 and good in the 5th
Sad to say - the most disppointing senior players were Du Plessis and Amla, Rosow was on average better than the more experienced Miller and Behardien was a passenger who does not have the batting ability to e in that squad. 
That is a real analysis of the situation.   The constant harping by you on De Kock is really not justified.   He had problems in Perth with the bouncing picth  and recovered afterwards.   I am much more worried about the other two top batters - Amla and Du Plessis than i am worried about De Kock.      

 The prejudiced are quiet about this - I wonder why?

 I know 1 player doesnt make a team but I do think the loss of JP was massive.we were close in 3 of our losses but couldnt close the game off.behardien parnell and mclaren are not good enough to bat 6 7 and 8.maybe mclaren at 8.parnell needs to do a lot of maturing... starting with a normal haircut. Behardien... big heart with average talent.  But not up to the grade.I still think that vaughn van jaarsveld needs another look in. Miller also battles to finish off at the end.so... selection time for aussie wickets.
amlade kockdu plessisde Villiersdumenymiller van jaarsveldpetersenphilandersteynomorkel
nicw balance with some good bowling options

 Chippo
I agree with you about Duminy - but the issue of the sixth batter is a problem.  I sort of like Rossouw - he was not at all bad in the games he played in and was in fat good in the Sydney game.  Another option is Stiaan van Zyl and obviously also Van Jaarsveld.   he was in teh squad a few years ago and folded badly in batting and was poor in fielding.   That may have put the selectors off him for keeps.   
In my opinion the better way to go would be to invest in Rossouw - who will give us acceptable service by the time the other players start retiring.   
I am not a Peterson follower and prefer Tahir in ODI's and T20 games.   However, in Australia playing sub-continent teams it would be better to go with 4 fast bowlers (add De Lange or Abbott) and  use Duminy to vary pace.   They can get at least a few overs out of Duminy and if need be Faf and De Villiers - making up the fifth bowler.
Not impressedby either of Berhardien, Mclaren or Parnell.       
    

Miller seems to flop more often than not....I'd rather have Rossouw. But what we are suffering from is similar to the rugby.....an experienced team is reaching its sell by date, and the new guys have to perform. Thus far they haven't.

Batter - a semiliquid mixture of flour, egg, and milk or water used in cooking, especially for making cakes or for coating food before frying.
Batsman - a player, especially in baseball and cricket, who is batti ng or whose chief skill is in batting.

Miller is another typical Dave pick....he looks the part and cracks when the pressure is on. Batter indeed. 
There is no consequence if they flop, just excuses. Yesterday Miller came in after a good start....flopppppp. And the maligned Behardien rips 70 runs in about  60 balls, and that is met with acrimony. Sounds a bit biased.

 Mozart
I looked at all matches and it was not De Kock and Miller that let the team down in t his series - it was Amla and Du Plessis that did not perform up to the required standard.   
I have no problem with Rossoue - neither with Miller.   The problem happens atthe very end of an innings where players have to ht out at everything and that is where poor balls take wickets.   
The problem is that this team in general performed btter than when Graeme Smith and Kallis was in the ODI.  Before this series the team won  16 out of 23 matches played since November 2013.   Two games were no result games due to rain and they lost 5.    Of the 5 losses Smith played and flopped in 3 games, and Kallis flopped in 3.    The last two flops caused Kallis to withdraw from ODI's as well.   
So it was not encessarily the remeoval of Smith and Kallis that caused the problem encountered in this series  - the new players that came in geenerally contributed better than their predecessors did.   It was just that in this series - Duminy was out and they were forced to play Behardien - while two experienced players under-perfomrmed.
The loss margin was small in three of the ODI's lost - so I am not really perturbed by the way the team performed.   
Insofar as Behardien is concerned in the last ODI  - you lost the plot again.   The SA batters took the compulsory second fielding restrictions early and the top Ausie bowlers completed their 10 overs - resulting in Behardien facing the less effective second string bowolers,   Whenever Behardien faced top bowlers he flopped.
          

Oh I see, he faced only poor bowlers. The trouble you and Dave have is you can't be honest. It was a brilliant innings. His six over the covers was the shot of the match. Your bias impacts your limited powers of observation.

Mozart 
I have made an honest assessment of the batting performances of all players in the SA squad who are essentially batters.   What more can I do than that?   Behardie has never been a successful ODI player - so all now depends on the one innings he batted well.    Fact is you are dishonest in assessment of players.  Your observation is clouded and inferior in qaulity.  You never take circumstances into account and now find fault when I repeated what theAussie commentators mentioned during the game.   Mozart before you make comments to try and discredit  Dave and myself - you take the exception and makes that the rule - at best a BS approach.   Behardien - ba the last OD I was a flop whether you like it or not.  You are suddenly championing Behardoien a fter shitting all over  De Kock previously.   Just like you - you made  De Kock Johnson's bunny a fter he bowled him out ONCE.  You pick on  De Kock for making 12 runs in total in the two Perth ODI's and kept entirely silent about Amla - who also made 12 runs in the twoo Perth ODI's.
The above is just one example of why nobody can ever trust your assessment of player performances - be it in cricket or rugby.