Gavin Rich keeping it real...

What a load of rubbish. I very much doubt if there's ever been a test match between the Springboks and the All Blacks where every single eligible and in-form player was fit and available . . . so why should this test match suddenly not count just because Retallick was crocked?

All teams have to cope with injuries. That's how depth is put to the test.

There is only one way to interpret the meaning of this result . . . the Springboks won and the All Blacks lost.

So Moffie are you saying that Jan has defended poorly this RC?  

No Vetsak I'm saying "our centre defence is very fragile"  and Jan is part of that, as we saw with his poor miss of Conrad Smith.  Likewise Jean is not effective defending at 13, whereas he plays 12 well.

 There is one thing the commentators mentioned and that is the fact that the Sprigboks ran out of steam in the second half.   The question is whoin the team ran out oif steam and here th problem is very clear,   It was in the Tight  5 and it put the whole team under the hammer.   
Poor forward play in the second half can be attributed to the utterly gruntless and tired Victor Matfield, brining on the harmless and absolutely worthless Bakkies Botha - who have shown zero capacity since his return to Springbok rugby in 2013 -  Jannoie du Plessis - who never lasts beyond 25 minutes in any game and to a lesser extent Beast.   
With Burger on the loosies did fine throughout the game.  
The endless flow of balls to the AB backline has exposed Hndricks as being worthless in defense.   The other main defensive problem was Jean de Villiers rushing out of line and opening gaps in the Springbok defensive line.   Mozart makes it out to happen only when he was in the number 13 position - but that is not th case at all.   Lie happened at Ellis Park last year - when he was a 12 - it is still happening this year.
The above can only be rectified if the Springboks can get -
*    the lock positions correct - it is no good to have a lock who runs out of steam and is gruntless and Bakkis Botha is at best useless on international level;
*    the tighthead needs to be corrected - we need a tighthead that last for at least 50 to 60 minutes and do not give away thoughtless penalties;
*    the defense issue in the center position needs to be corrected - if De Villiers rushed out of line and open up gaps for attackers, and is unable to correct that problem, it is time for him to retire gracefully; and
*    We need to get a reliable 14 in the team - being good in both attacking play and defense,  Hendricks is a top class finisher - but whatever good he brings to the team, we lose on the side of very poor defense.
If we had a good Tight 5 combination from the start - that could last at least 55 minutes - the later problesms would not have occurred.   
      

Jan was a pillar, but more like a planted pillar than a pillar of strength as Smith sailed round the outside of him without breaking stride......slow.  

 Mozart
Balls - lets look at the stats again:-
de Villiers0/001/9/81710206/40/010/0

Serfontein0/100/6/134312106/20/010/0
Both De Villiers and Serfontein showed defensive deficiencies on Saturday - but De Villiers were far worse than Serfontein.   Aside from that - rushing up and not even attempting tackles is not reflected in the above figures - so to De Villiers poor defense stats must be added at least 2 other defense liabilities.     
De Villiers's missed tackle ratio was 40% - that of Seerfontein 25%.   De Villiers was clearly the real problem in the center defense set up - and not the first time either.   
  

I like Jan very much and he will grow in confidence and I do hope he is around for some time to come, but some (not all) of his defence was pi55 weak I have to admit.Hendricks is pretty ordinary in defence but Savea has the tendency to make many appear weak.  

 Monsterbok
Jan is basically a 12 - he is not a 13 - and will always be a btter 12 than a 13.   I have a problem with De Villiers - other than the two tries he scored against the Aussies - which tries were made for him by others - he was below par in all the tests he played in this year.   Compared to his performances last year - he was a questionable player. 
I see Serfontein as our future 12 - but the question remains - what is to happen at 13. To my mind the future `13 will be De Allende.  I think Meyer is working on him as a 13.  In the first game against Argentina - his first game at 13 since his school days - he missed two tackles - but was the only SA backline player that showed really acceptable ball carrying capacity.   In the second game he missed one tackle - but he was also the top back line ball carrier in the team.   He has a tendency to isloate himself in carryig the ball - but he also has the ability to off-loadd balls well in tackle situations.   Those deficiencies can be ironed out and will be - he is too good a player not to be successful.
I have my doubts whether - taking into account the deterioration in Jean de Villiers performances since last year - whether he would last through to the WC next year.   Super 15 next year will indicate whether that would happen - but the present center scenario must be worrisome to Meyer.   As I said - we may go the the WC with a Serfontein - De Allende centr combination.    


  

Yeah thanks to Jean and his habitual rushes that cock things up  

Not really. When you get a chance to tackle a player in a dangerous position you make the tackle. The young Jean/ Joubert or even Fury would never have missed that tackle.
You can't make Steppie or JJ good by pointing out that other players were also culpable. That was a test match losing tackle, but for Lambie's miracle kick.

 Mo\zart
As per normal you go for Serfontein based on what you perceive as his deficiencies.   But you perception is always badly biased.  When last week the match was discussed on SKY TV in New Zealand - the only backline player Christian Cullen mentioned as a problem for the AB's  was Serfontein.   
You see him as a lost cause - others and for that matter people in the know, sees him as a good player.   But then the facts you produce is so garbled and bent - one can hardly take note of them.
But for the kick by Lambie - the test match was lost when Sam Whitelock outjumped Matfield completely and took our throw-in from him.   That was the crucial issue  here.  This is not the only line-out buggered up late in the game by Matfield - it happened twice before in earlier matches in the RC.  It definitely could have been a different result in the Wellington test if Matfield was good enough in the last line-out - he was not - and we lost the game.  



   

So now it's Whitelock who " out jumped"  Matfield, not Luatua. Or perhaps you just imagined that as well. Call Jean culpable, call Matfield culpable if you like....in Steppie we still have a centre who is vulnerable to pace. Blame the good lord for that one if you like.