Our try tells you a few things.

 Mozart, one of the 2 front runners physically obstructed Cruden from tackling Hendricks. The other went behind Luatua and caused him to go further forward instead of sliding laterally.

 Matfeild, De Villiers and Pienaar didn't play a crucial role in that particular try, it was Pollard and Hendricks that orchestrated the try. It was a basic phase which a lot of players can execute so why overrate De Villiers and Matfeild as if they done something significant in that phase? They have been dumped on continuously because we have solid reasons whereas you don't have any good reasoning as to why we shouldn't be critical regarding Matfeild and De Villiers. 

 He he, you noticed that too Hakwa, lol Well, we don't make a fuss about such things

Vermulen made the midfield carry, but the lineout take was Matfield. 

 SB you're right...the irony haha

Matfield to Pienaar to Pollard to Vermeulen.
Ruck.
Pienaar to Pollard to Hendricks.

Serf and Jean were the dummy runners inside Hendricks.

It was a well executed play.

 Mozart
The situation is basic - if Morne was involved the whilem thing would never ghave worked - with the playrs you are taklking about - it is a theory that they would  have caused the process not to work.   
The role of the flyhalf was the key here - the rest were inicdental.   Matfield took the line out ball - what made it so superb?   Maybe the line out he buggered up near the end ofthe game - where the move was to try a dru=ing maul and he funbled the ball.  If he did not - the score could have been different.   His involvement in the try scoring move was routine - his involvement in the second one was showing what he really is. 
Both De Villiers and Sefrfontein were dummy runners - what made  De Villiers so good and Serfontein so bad in this case?  Flawed viewpoint as per normal.   

 Interesting thing is,we only scored a try once we were structured.Attack just like in the army,can only be effective if its organised,structured and carefully orchestrated.Question is why did we not do it again....Thats the more important question.The capabilities of the players do count bit actually a bunch of well trained highschool first teams can pull moves like that off...EASILY.

We hardly ever put ourselves in a position to do it again. The only times we got in the All Black half of the field for most of the game was when we kicked into their territory, which gave them possession so we didn't really play there or stay there long. A major flaw in our tactical approach was this disregard for territory. Pollard could have done that, but in the second half he hardly saw the ball. Hougaard did nearly all the kicking, with no effect. We only had two kickable penalties all game, one from long range and another which we declined with 6 minutes to go, because we didn't play enough in All Black territory. 

 Conclusion:You cant win games if you don't have the ball to play with.Nz'lnd are master at making sure ball possession is theirs and theirs only.

 Youtube replay 0.17seconds-->Forward Pass, Obstruction of Cruden at 0.57seconds and 1.04seconds

FA
We didn't execute it again simply because it wouldn't work in the second attempt as the opposition would be aware of it. The important question is how many set pieces do we really have up our sleeve and if its more than just the one we've seen why didn't the boks execute the other setpeices? I can recall the set piece in the british and irish lions tour when Habana scored that try and others years after, having said that I am convinced that there are more set pieces although not many always work out of course but we should be seeing more when the opportunity is right.

In that last minute the boks should've spread the ball to the right and not blindside where there is no space with too many defenders, obviously De Jager will drift in to touch. It was more so the player that passed it who was the culprit at that crucial moment.

On the ball point Pakie, we have to beat tackles to retain the ball.....otherwise you have churning phase play, likely to lead to turnovers. In 80 runs we beat only 10 tackles. Forty per cent of those by Hendricks. Unti Serfontein can beat tackles, he can't be considered a successful test centre.
Thanks SB I stand corrected, it was Vermeulen who made the mid field carry.

 Rubbish hakwa there was no forward pass or obstruction, you really do not know the difference between a decoy runner which is used in a set piece move and a obstruction. 

I guess you would also think this is obstruction in this video by Jaque Fourie at 0:22 seconds of this clip. You are wrong.
 

 Jerome
There are more than one set piece - any team has a variety of set pieces that they cn intorduce any time in the game.  However, when it comes to execution - it depends on the players.
Lets look at the situation in practice - it still depends on the players involved.   When Pienaar was replaced by Hougaard 90% of the set piecews went out of the window - because he decided on a kicking game and a passing game to the forwards - with very few passes to the flyhalf - the latter only to make relieving kicks and not to attack.   That basicaly put pay to any possible attacking play.
Despite what people on this site may say - I have always been of the opinion that Hougaard is not an acceptable scrummie.  He has no idea about reading of the game and therefore his decisionmaking is poor.   Execution is often enough worse -so we have a robotic scrummie with noo idea about varied play at all.    He failed badly in 2012 and he failed again on Saturday.    
Scrummies like Pretorius, Reinach and Groom has outplayed him in the past and unlike Hougaard they are in fact natural scrummies.   Would prefer any of those three ahead of Hougaard in the Springbok team.  

 Mozart
Jean has beaten less tackles than Serfontein did in all foramts of the game - Super 15 and tests - this year.   The question is not only Serfontein - but also Jean de Villiers.   He is a lot worse than he was last year when his performances were excellent.  
The only center we have that beat a lot of tackles this year was De Allende - but you have been critical of him as well.   
I think that if we want any attacking play in the center situation - it will have to include De Allende at 13.  Jacque Foruie in three tests last year showed good defense - not better than Serfontein though - and he showed less than Zero in attack - so he is not the answer either.   

 I am not going to lie...I don't like Carthorse de Allende.He has no attacking flair and he smacks of some one that is in love with himself just like Bobby Skinstad was.Untill he puts in some good runs and scores tries and deffends like Jaques Fourie then he can stay on the bench untill he is blue in the face like Lambie.Beaides I think Mvovo is a better prospect at centre then this carthorse.

 If Matfield had anything to do with this try I can only say..........LUCKY TRY.

AJ 
Matfield did what locks did tens of thousands of times in rugby - he took a clean line out ball on own throw.    That is where the whole issue ends insofar as his own contribution is concerned.   He did play a role - but was the least essentail of all the roll players in this case. 

 What rubbish that try was all about Pollard and Hendricks the rest if them were completely insignificant.
But more to the point....for the test as a whole Matfield was a passenger who looked physically not up to the job and Jean was awful with his running straight into defenders and missing conventional tackles.
As for Pienaar he has been useless all year.
Pollard with that try showed what we have been missing at 10 with useless Morne there.

 Tin soldier your rugby ignorance is glaring - you think de Allende is a car horse - take it you missed this year's s 15 while playing army? 
No attacking ability wow what utter shit - he was easily our best back this s15 you ignora nt fool
Go back to the bush you dunce

 FA Allende is fast enough to play on the wing. Excellent prospect and has a great Bok future I would reckon. Breaks tackles regularly
Have to say thanks to the esteemed WP man Jerome for educating ou hacked waaagh!
It all goes to show how the kbbs are trying desparately to put a positive spin on their fortuitous win. Remember the wee abs were 10 % below their best according to spin doctor JW etc etc. Hahahahahahahahahaha

 de Allende is slow as a wet week and totally out of his league in Test Rugby so please put him in your starting team Meyer.....PLEASE!!!Thanks Hakwa for pointing out the obvious RAL for the Boks...

 Moola you know fuck all

 Thanks Saff! I presume the removed words were "everything above"??

 moooo la you seem more unhinged today than normal!

 Yeah something like that. One reads some shit at times yours is right up there 

Beeno: glad you are in better spirits now & the bitterness of defeat is passing, much like the gaseous comet that propelled Storming Ed.
Beeno in retreat yet again         
A rather unpleasant gas & he seems to be "full of it"

The Lomp fans are talking Willemse...and the Goosen fans are talking Pollard. They could have saved time by listening to moz.  

Wrong Lood is a class act and it's a close call between Lood and Willemse....Willemse has the slight physical edge, Lood the higher intensity. If it's Willemse starting then Lood on the bench and vise versa.
Goosen is not available to play hence his non selection. Don't kid yourself that Pollard is preferred. Goosen remains my first choice.

 One of the Goosen fans has even started hallucinating. For example, by reading an article, believing that they have noticed Ebersohn playing for Racing Metro and then seeing Goosen (concussio n and all) playing against Toulon, this weekend.

Yep as far as Goosen is concerned there is lots of hallucinating. To my best knowledge the last time Goosen made a convincing run with the ball is when he ran 50 metres and then hurt his shoulder. But the myth goes on.
Dave... Lomp has the advantage of intensity.....hahaha....I doubt that. He looks like a good spokesman for sleeping pills.

 Lood was the best lock in this year's s15 en ough said

No he wasn't. He was the most hyped lock in the S15. Retallik was the best lock, by a mile.  

 Rubbish Retallick had a quiet s15 by his standards had a few great tests lately but disappeared against the Boks.
Lood was huge this s15 hype had stuff all to do with it. You would not know a good lock if he slapped you in the face. Hell you still think exposed Matfield and Bakkies are the business. You were also a fan of useless Johan Muller and best of all you supported Jakes pathetic call of Albert v/d Bergh. 
Lood like Etzebeth will have a long Bok career. These youngsters are better than Bakkies and Matfield at the same age

Hunchback Loodvoet.

 Let me guess vlagshit you don't rate hi m either