The Matfield yellow in the WC semi....

....any retractions RooiAAS, or do you still believe Matfield got a yellow for his "dangerous" tackle. It was so dangerous he must have been cited....but no he was the MOM the next week in the Bronze medal game. So tell us Lush how many pops did you have before you came up with that pretty fiction? LMAOFY!

 Mozart
Best advice to forget about the flop Matfield in the WC.  He destroyed a reasonable chance o beat the AB's by having a penalty turnaround for a neck grab and the list of flops started with the Japan game - where he ignored Meyer's game instructions and looked like a fool after the game was lost.
The man was putrid after return from his retirement and got lost in games causing problems whenever he played.
Forget also about the WC bronz medal match against the Argentinian "B" team - have a llook at the Malherbe stats for the game and the Matfield stats:-
Malherbe0/000/0/3211101 17/10/010/0
Matfield0/000/3/5230000 16/15/000/0

Now give me one solid reason why Matfield was MOM his ball carries in particular was worse than Malherbe's as well as the tackle record.   He got that award as a farewell gift - nothing else.    

 Mike,There is no doubt the Matfield indiscretion cost the Boks at a crucial time in the game but to say he was carded is a blatant lie. I believe that is the point being made in the above post.

Hmm.....well perhaps the fact that Malherbe conceded a turnover and a penalty counted against him. But as usual you miss the point, the string is about Lochte's claim Matfield got a yellow in the semi. Perhaps you would care to support your leader's claim?

 Well now, can we expect a bit of honesty? I mean, the facts are the facts.

I was mistaken. Matfield cost us the RWC semifinal when his neck roll resulted in a penalty reversal but no, he wasn't yellow carded as I stated earlier.

An honest mistake, nothing more . . . but the fact that the board's resident blowhard and his squealing little Gimp are tr* mpeting this error as though it's some great victory in their sad and pathetic lives while shrieking about "blatant lies" just shows what kind of spiteful and childish little losers they are.

 Alright, you've fessed up now let's move on but calm down....all we needed is a retraction and you've done that....no need to go off into a dummy spit.

". . . all we needed is a retraction . . ."

Who do you think you are, Dense? You and your master Moffie can stamp your little feet and demand retractions until the cows come home . . . I really couldn't give a flying fig leaf what you weak little losers think about anything.

I'm making a correction . . . not for your benefit or for Moffie's and certainly not at your insistence. Have you got that, low-life?

As for you telling me to "calm down" after you started screeching about a "blatant lie" with your eyes out on stalks and spittle flying everywhere, that is a bit rich!

I'm always calm on this board, chump, you're the one who gets all worked up and tearful . . . remember?

 Sounds like you suffer from a bipolar disorder....is that one of the side effects after your rehabilitation?

Hmmmm . . . maybe I am bipolar . . . I switch between thinking you're the world's biggest suck-up and the world's most ill-bred low-life.

 I guess there's a downside to having had a drug addiction, mind you your disorder can be treated.....it just takes time. Don't go back on the dop now....or the pilletjies.
Vasbyt, alles sal regkom.

Well your misapprehension certainly explains why you thought Matfield cost the game, when he only cost 8 of 19 possible minutes. Whatever your views were, he now has to be less culpable....now that you have been corrected.

 Moz please be soft on our friend, sounds like he's cold turkeying now that he's had to retract his false allegation. It's not been a good kick-off to his Friday, going by his above posts it sounds like his  frothing at the mouth.

Off he goes tail between his legs.

 Mozart
I saw what Rooinek wrote as quoted by you was wrong.   That does mot take away the fact that Matfield was a liability for teams after returning from retirement.  By the way - the reason I think Matfield got the MOM was that as per normal he was moonlighting in the backline and the commentators could easily see his tackles and forgot that he also ad to do some Tight 5 work - which went AWOL.  
Howev er, to discus Matfield is really spilled milk.  It is best to remember Matfield in his hay-day and forget about what he buggered up in 2014 and 2015.    He really spoilt his reputation by coming back to rugby and unfortunately what is remembered by many people is the bugger-ups and not his good play  when he was still capable of performing.  .        

 Matfiled cost us the world cup no doubt about it. Pathetic player and never has been.Winning the world cup might have saved Meyer. Unfortunately matfiled's R asputin like grip on Meyer sunk the ship.Thankfully we will never see matfield in Bok colours again. 

Matfield may be back as a coach Beeno, just imagine him in a green Bok blazer - it could happen