The problems on Saturday that caused the loss of the game

And the fact Kuridrani ran through Damian's channel for free all day wasn't cause for concern? He directly affected two Aussie tries and nearly caused a third. But that's of no significance, right? The point about Bismarck is valid, but Strauss was far from weak. What you all failed to pick up on is Australia changed tact in the second half. They played a more direct game playing their ball carriers with huge punch runs. They played them round the corner like the Reds do with Cooper. They also played all their rugby in our half. So we lost the aerial battle and territory battle. We also lost ascendency in the front row. Malherbe having a very poor game in the scrum and being invisible outside of it. Losing Coetzee made little difference as he was barely present. Our ball carriers for the most part lost the battle and only Lood played with greater force. We need Duane and Alberts to give us dominance in the power stakes. We also need to drop Damian. Pienaar was good everywhere but for his kicking. Our chasers were not good.

 Alberts is the least of your problems if you pick him lol. I mean the guy can barley move as it is. 

 Desert Fox
i looked at the game and made notes on your descriptions of what actually happened. and every thing about De Allende's defence was twisted beyond recognition.   I saw  4 tackles missed by De Allende and that was not good enough.  Your descriptions of the tackles made were so twisted - it is unbelievable.  when the tackled player goes straight down you said he dragged the allende.  when the commentator said it was a good tackle you describe it exactly otherwise.   when there was not the remotest chance of a missed tackle you say it looks like it.  that the of description showed prejudice and is absolutely BS in buckets.  A school boy error is mentioned when the right thing was done by De Allende and he took up the correct position to defend against a pass to Folau.   When De Allende has to defend against two players - he guarded against the carrier - but before a tackle was necessary the ball was passed to the outside player.  Was it De Allende's mistake that a pass was made?
The problem is that your bias was so obvious it caused you to be a fool in what you describe as actually happening.  You could not fault de Allende on attacking play so you tried to disgrace him in defence.  However, where the missed out completely is that he made 15 tackles and statistically missed 6.   That is not acceptable at all - it is 15% higher than it should be.   However the stats are still better than those of the piss-poor Steyn and De  Jongh in tests they played in and in Super 15.    

The reason we lost is:
1) Malherbe cracked in the key Bok scrum under our poles, handing possession to Oz
2) Lomp  who was lined up on Hooper was dummied.
3) De Allende left a huge gap after the hooter for Kuridrani to run into and then missed the tackle.

If just one of those things never happened we would probably have won the test.the funny thing is I warned about all three weaknesses.....Malherbe's vulnerability under pressure, Lomps inability to read the situation eg when he very similarly missed the Bargie scrum half for a try, and Damien's defensive issues. I have been castigated for these views in the nastiest ways. But Saturday they all came home to roost.

The funny thing is before watching the match late Saturday, none of these things were obvious....even in the one eyed match reports. If we can't call things honestly, we will never make improvements.
 

Lood is powerful, but very immobile. He has to line you up like a rhino. But Damian? I sure would have liked to have had Frans' stopping power in our 22 in that last movement.

Frans's stopping power would equate to what De Allende did to him in the Stormers game - in other words it is basically not in existence anymore.   Fransie always was a questionable defender like missing 4 tackles in the WC final - but it is much worse now.   he is too slo tpo be a god defender in any event.  

 Mozart
You specialized in lies - now don't you.  Insofar s the Hooper try is concerned -Simmons had the ball and De Jager kept him upright - any other thing would have caused a try in any event.  Simmons slipped the ball to Hooper who went over and scored.  One thing is for bloody sure and that is De Jager was not to blame for that try and you are a liar in what you wrote.  One thing is for bloody sure - Matfield would not have been able to keep Simmons out - he is physically to weak for that.
As for the other two incidents is concerned the Malherbe one is a garbled lie as well.   There were two scrums in the closing minutes of the game.  In the first scrum the scrum went slightly back and the ball was hooked and Burger trapped behind the try line and forced to dot down the ball.  That was followed by the second scrum - where Malherbe stood and kept his place and both Strauss and Van der Merwe collapsed.   Your allegations are absolute BS - and that is a fact.   Malherbe did not crack as you put it and that is a fact.
De Allende did miss a tackle on Kuridrani in that case - so that was one of the tackles he did miss.   However - he was not as bad as you and your fellow idiot made him out to be.  
The rest of your story remains standard Mozart BS AND LIES - end of story.        

 Did Pollard not miss a tackle just before that try?