I really want to believe Aphiwe Dyantyi... his hearing starts today

Mozart

How many hours do you spent in trying to find fault with your pet hate players?   And then your descriptions as to what you would want to happen are totally bizarre and theoretical, but would not have the result of what you said would be possible.   Willie fouled up in both moves  you tried  to blame De Allende for and in the first one you lied about Farrell being involved  as well,   Willie lost the ball when tackled by the English no 7 for hanging on to the ball and not passing it earlier,   

In essence  I look at facts - I do not try and invent misrepresentations like you do,                     

Mozart - that incident you dreamed up was not even in the extended highlights and it would have been if in any way it was an effective attack with or without scoring of a try,   Mozart got  confused in a desperate attempt to discredit the outstanding De Allende performance in the Final,   

Now lets look at your account.   

Point 1   You blamed De Allende previously for the incident  I mentioned,   However after it was  found that you lied about what really happened, and your claim was also false anyway you tried to find another incident.   

Point 2 - if that was a routine tackle the moon indeed  is made of green cheese.   When the ball was passed  to May De Allende was in the middle of the field and chased over to try and tackle May near the sideline.    Like happened in the  case of the Kolbe try by Farrell De Allende overran and he was stepped on the inside - you claim it was the outside,   Total BS on your part  again.    Routine  tackle it could never be,

Point 3 -  Here is an extract from the ESPN stats on the game.    

 Number of balk carries 7  - number of meters gained in total 8 meters.  He ran about 6 meters with the balk and then made a poor pass to Kolbe,  In any event it was never a significant attack in the game and as per normal De Allende ensured that the ball be recovered from the breakdown.    Top play on his part and not effective from Willie.

Point 4  -  Go back and look at the game again -  the tackle on  Willie when he spilled the ball was made by Underhill and not Ford,   Willie had three players outside of him and instead of passing the ball timeously he hung on to it and spilled it.   There were three players outside of him when he spilled the ball. 

Another plea - if you want to find fault with a player please make sure what you wrote on site is true -  not a single incident from that game was as you described it,                  

STFU, julle oubalies asb.   ........ what happened to our druggie wingman ?

"De Allende ensured that the ball be recovered from the breakdown"

Sums up the level of ambition in the Bok camp. And the level of sophistication in the Bok blueprint. 

So Underhill wore the 10 jersey  .....in the Provincial Ad ministration’s version of events. What a clown!

Go and check stupid and see what happened in the case when Willie spilled the ball.    Willie under the high ball in thr final was good - his kicking was so=so and passing was poor and inaccurate,    Definitely not a performance that one would call of any top class rating,   At best possible a 6/10 performance.

De Allende was 8/10, Pollard  8,5/10, Du Toit 8/10, Vermeulen 8,5/10, Beast 8/10 and Malherbe 8/10 and Mostert 6,5/10.   .        

Step 5 .... when caught out lying, change the subject. Are you still claiming Underhill tackled Willie? 

I did not lie about anything at all,  Youi were caught lying repeatedly and that is because you try to discredit players you hate and then get caught lying about incidents.  So far you lied about the tackle on Lam, you lied about the attack and defense when Willie spilled  the ball, you lied about the other incident you had to find to replace the incidents already discredited .

Now go back and find another real incident so we can enjoy the joke,  The last one was putrid and total BS anyway.          

Are you still saying Underhill tackled Willie....it’s a simple yes or no.

Whose that?   No player by the name of  Underwood.    Your first attack on De Allende was the one where he tried to draw in defenders and made a direct attack and was tackled merely for doing that.   That according to you prevented the attack on the line.   According to you in that one Farrell drifted out to cover Willie and De Allende should take the gap left by Farrell.   Farrell was not even in the defensive line at all,   Aside from that the ball was spilled by Willie instead of passing it to the  three players outside of him when tackled by Underhill.   If De Allende did what Willie did you would have written a book about it.  

Then there was the tackle on May - that one was not a standard direct tackle  and was a definite miss because May stepped him in the process and passed him on his inside.   You then lied and claimed he beat him on the outside.    When I pointed out that Farrell made the same mistake when trying to tackle you lied again. 

So after being thoroughly discredited in both your previous invented discrediting of De Allende you then find another incident that was totally innocuous and would have been another turnover of the ball to England was it not for De Allende.  It does not matter who tackled Willie in that case - he passed the ball - a very poor pass to Kolbe before eh was tackled and Kolbe hung onto the ball by a miracle and ran into the defensive shield formed by then by the English,   You even claimed that ESPN lied about the distance covered by Willie in that case.    Be it as it may was it not for De Allende the ball would have been turned over.

In another post you claimed that Du Toit should have prevented the try scored by the Welsh in the semi - another thoroughly discredited story because what you said happened did not happen.   What about the knock-on of Willie with an open tryline in front of him  in the semi.  If  De Allende did  that another book would have followed. 

It really is sick that you try to discredit players who performed extremely well in the final and give undeserved credit to people who did make mistakes.            

Are you still saying Underhill tackles Willie....yes you were right or no you were lying?

Old Lügnerin gets a bump on the nose again! Things never change. Lügies, here's a hint: your narrative isn't working, it hasn't worked and will never work. 

Mozart 

I was clear on what I wrote - I told you when Underhill tackled Willie correcting one of your previous lies and if anyone tackled Willie after that abortion of a pass to kolbe was immaterial anyway,   You had so many lies involving De Allende's performance in the final that I am waiting for your next lie,    

You even implied that ESPN lied about Willie's ball carry and that was what pyt you lioes in perspective.    

Foo-wee ..... I'm still waiting to hear what happened to Aphiwe

AO 

The dimmest ever member of this site is back,   If Mozart lies it does not imply he made anybody who correct the lies the victor,     

A simple question drol, did Underhill tackle Willie.....yes or no. Show you have some integrity and reverse your lie. This will follow every exchange  we have until you correct the lie.

I do not care who tackled Willie after the poor pass to Kolbe since it was totally immaterial  and produced nothing,    Despite the poor pass Kolbe hung onto the ball and when he was tackled De Allende was there to protect the ball from being turned over.   

However, that insignificant incident you dreamed up and lied about is the third lying incident you came up about De Allende.    The real problem incident was when  Willie was tackled by Underhill and spilled the ball instead of passing it with three players outside of him and a clear opportunity of scoring was lost - that in fact was  that you were caught lying and then you tries to find another incident of zero consequence.   How come you implied that ESPN lied about Willie/s ball carrying - please explain that one.     

It's simple. Dud expected a crashball. It's his only, I hesitate to use the word, "weapon". He blew an opportunity because he has no vision, awareness, skills or talent. He was a wing at heart who liked to roam out in space. Now, he isn't even that. 

Did you actually watch the final?  I would be surprised if you did,  because what you wrote is total garbage,   You refer to him as if he is like Esterhuizen - a player with no vision, awareness and sills or talent.  A player White said had no abilities as a backline player when he tried him as a 7 and found he had nothing to offer ion that position as well.     You are indeed confu sed,   

Oh you don’t care who tackled Willie? After trying to correct me....stop squirming, who tackled Willie?

Mozart

The first attack on De Allende was a total lie and it did not go down well with you  soi you started another attack based on zero.  Again the lies flowed  like lava  and a totally innocuous incident - not selected  by you top cover for your BS,    The action by Willie when he tried to outpace Ford and carried the ball for about 6 meters over the gain line was meaningless and  not really worth commenting  on.   Willie made a poor pass to Kolbe - which he managed to catch and that is where De Allender ensured the ball was retained by the springboks entirely because of De Allende.   Willie was tackled practically without the ball - so why is that tackle of any importance at all?  

What was important was the case where Willie instead of passing the ball hung onto it for too long and when tackled by Underhill spilled the ball - really eliminating a  try being scored because there were a double overlap with three players outside of him\..    That was a most important deficiency and confirms that you not only lied about that incident - you lied about the latest one as well.      

Who tackled Willie? Just admit you lied and the nightmare of having to write these long attempts to change the subject  will end

The STINKING LIAR accusing others of lying.

You couldn't make this up!

Mozart

Are you still a bloody idiot.   You lied about the first incident in respect of which you criticized De Allende and then ran to the second one when caught out.   As per normal with you instead of admitting your lies you looked for the second incident.    That incident was total BS again and I pointed it out.   Is ESPN still lying about Willie's ball carries and what difference does it make whether Willie was tackled since by then the ball was in the hands of Kolbe who managed to get it after a very poor pass. 

I still refer to your first misdemeanor in which Willie was turned into your hero and buggered up an attack when he was tackled and lost the ball forward instead of passing it to the three players outside of him.   So for a change admit that you write BS on site to discredit top performers in the Springbok team whom you hate with a vengeance        .    

Okay .....show me the comment I made about the ‘first incident’. Paste it right below....go ahead Pervie.

You posted BS about De Allende ending an attack by noit going through a gab caused by Farrell when he moved further out to cover Willie and creating a space De Allende did not use,   It was all a total lie and when anyone looking at  what really happened,   However, when you were caught out you went quiet on the issue and now you as expected deny that you posted the garbage,   A liar can now pretend he did not post what he did.    

The incident you mentioned happened in minute 5,42 and was totally distorted by you that IU clearly stated that what you wrote never happened,        

That’s the same incident you painfully dumb doos....and it happened at exactly minute 3.42, as I posted.

"go ahead Pervie."

No man, not necessary...don't go all Rudeneck on us.

...it's a donkey...and I'm not questioning your rugby judgement on this thread...you are probably spot on....I lost track...which match are under scrutiny ATM ? It's about time I watch the final again.

Minute 3.42 of the WC final....my contention is Willie made our best  break of the half and Dud Allende did a poor job of backing the break. But that’s a matter of opinion, everybody is entitled to their own. What is not a matter of opinion is that Willie had to hold his pass for Kolbe to get in position, that the pass was made in the tackle and  somewhat impeded and that the tackler was George Ford. 

Mozart

Bring back your tale about the attack by the Boks where De Allende prevented the scoring of a try because Farrell moved out to cover Willie and De Allende did not use the resultant gap thus created.   Problem was that there was nothing like that in evidence and it was a total lie.

The one you refer to now had no real chance to produce anything,    Willie tried to outrun Ford - which he failed to do and he made about 8 meters in the process - when you claimed it was 20 meters.  The cover defense was already in place and Willie made a shit poor pass to Kolbe who were tackled and De Allende by being a thinking player made sure he was there to protect the ball and prevent a turnover.   it was of no importance in the game as a whole and never featured in any highlights package of the game.   

What you think and what really happened is vastly different from each other,   Dreamt up BS is your total contribution in this case.              .     

If anyone knows a good surgeon then perhaps we could start a secret funding campaign to have a third testicle implanted in the lad.

...and then evoke the Caster defence IE higher testosterone due to nuts that shouldn't be there.

That is a new point in low down BS only to be expected from you,  In th e final the English commentator said De Allende was the most impressive Springbok back line player in the whole world cup series and I rather believe that than the lying BS you always come up with on site.   They even picked him for the team made up of all players in the series, so keep it up - we expect nothing bar BS from you.          

It's worse then that Moz. Every player from 1 to 15 are trained moves, and are expected to execute these in a live game. It's every player's responsibility to read play and be able to contribute to functional attacking movements irrespective to the number on their back. Think back to Eben stealing a botched restart from Australia in 2015. Everyone was in position to form two layers of attack; forwards and backs. Why was Damian's first reaction to move inwards? Is this part of Josè's gameplan? Is Damian just not cut out for this level of rugby? Or both? 

Like AO - he knows nothing about rugby - zero at all and come up with constant BS and like Mozart his brain goes into reverse when it comes to his pet hate players.   

By the way AO  the fact is that Meyer was the coach in 2015 and coached the Boks to play planless and negative rugby like normal with his favourite Esterhuizen - same as he did at Stade Francais. 

Willie's  intent was clear to everyone on the field, but not to Mozart.   They know and so did the commentators that he was trying to outrun Ford, which he could not do and De Allende knew it.   Willie then made a poor pass to Kolbe who hung onto the ball - which everyone thought was a miracle and he was tackled by the cover defense.    Seeing what was about to happen De Allende kept in such a position that he could cover the tackled player and prevent a ball turnover. 

Incidentally Willie's passing deteriorated to a level of school boy rugby.   He made three passes in the final and one went forward and two poor ones to Kolbe -  one he magically hung onto and the other Kolbe knocked on.    Then there was the Willie knock-on in the Welsh semi with an open tryline in front of him.   

All-in-all a poor series for Willie and he will be replaced s ooner rather than later at full back.