Your vote Matfield or Lood

 Mozart is rendered speechless as he realizes he may be wrong

 Lomp and Etzebeth are the same player....with Eben stronger, faster, more aggressive. Start Eben, bring on Lomp after 55 minutes. At 5 play Victor who lasts better than any other Bok tight forward....best spread of energy, mobility and leadership. 
Why play two of the same types, losing mobility and smarts. All those Lomp runs could have been just as effectively if not more effectively handled by Etzebeth and Vermeulen. If there was any evidence our mauls or scrums were weaker against Samoa there might be a case....there is no such evidence.

JW my original I-Pad is on its last legs, so I'm finding it rather tricky... but it's kind of nice having one of the very first ones. So I am soldiering on in spite of chirps from the peanut gallery. On that momentous day when  I am really wrong the poles will probably shift.

 Moz, pragmatist that you are, it would probably take a cataclysmic event for you to be proven wrong.

Why be wrong when you can be right...haha. The trick is always to shape an escape route 

 That much is obvious.

 This is dismal taking into account that a strong Tight 5 is necessary to be at least competitive to ensure that the team as a whole is competitive.  The scrum and mauls are taken out by Matfield being without grunt - turning the Springboks Tight 5 into a Tight 4.   So what "balance" does Matfield bring to the Tight 5?
Over the past year in every game the Springboks lost and even those they won by a small margin - the dominance  by the opposition team Tight 5 was the reason for the loss or even when we managed to win the games the Springbok Tight 5 was under stress.   The main problem in the Tight 5  has been the gruntless Matfield.
Mozart says he has not seen any weakness in Matfield's performance, but the weakness is so obvious to anybody who knows rugby and see what is going on in that case,             

 No can find one word to argue with on this post:
mozart
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 13610RE: Your vote Matfield or Lood
October 05, 2015, 18:58:19

 

Except CleverMike who may objective to the use of the name Matfield

We have had powerful mauling with Victor for a long time now. Besides, is one player really going to make a difference? Which mauls has he stuffed up? Have we had better scrumming with Lood in place of Victor? I thought Jannie was ruining our scrums? Yet our scrum was less stable when Malherbe came on. You aren't really saying very much, well in terms of information, certainly not in brevity! 

Wrong Moz PSDT is just as good as Lood and Etzebeth and will prove that in time.
Etzebeth and Lood to start with PSDT on the bench. 
Moz you have not been right about any of your player calls for until we have a world beating side that sets the standard you can't measure the success of a player. The fact that our useless coach selects or drops a particular player is of no consequence given how poor our results are. 
Matfield should no longer be playing rugby and I for one hope we never see him in a Bok jersey again.
Modern locks like Etzebeth and Lood are monsters plus great athletes....the days of an enforcer at 4 and an athlete at 5 are done. The modern game requires two monster athletes....ie Etzebeth, Lood, Jacques du Plessis, PSDT and Willemse.
Matfield is a joke these days....a physical liability 

"In this case the rugby real rugby lovers and knowledgeable members voted for Lood  "

= The Kruger-Dunning effect

 DF
I want to ask you have you seen where Matfield is whenever the Springboks start a maul and move forward?  Even if Matfield is the original catcher of the ball and supposed to direct the maul - he is pushed out of contention landing on the grass out of the maul.  He then gets up and use his arms - not his shoulder to support the maul, about as effective as the scrummie would be if he joins the maul.
In practice Matfield - even when told to do so by Meyer - routinely makes sure that mauls are not formed like happened in the Japan test,  because he is not physically strong enough to be effective in that component of the game.
His role and impact  in mauls is virtually non-existent.             

 The Barking Dogs....having predicted the Boks wont make the Quarters are now barking about Matfield. They think it's there one chance to be right.

 This BS is duplicated  in every post of Mozart.  What an idiot that one is and a liar as well.  He is always right in his deluded mind so what can one expect from a habitual liar.  

Without Matfield and Jean in the side we could win the WC.......especially since passive Pienaar has been dropped. Jannie is injured to, which is a bonus. We now just need to lose Louw and the Cup is ours.
This side could win the WC for sure:
15. Willie 14. JP 13. Kriel 12. de Allende 11. Habana 10. Pollard 9. du Preez 1. Beast 2. Bismark 3. Malherbe/Coenie 4. Etzebeth 5. Lood 6. Schalk 7. PSDT 8. Vermeulen
16. Strauss 17. Nyakane 18. Coenie/Malherbe 19. Alberts 20. Kolisi 21. Paige 22. Lambie 23. Serfontein
Sadly however, useless Matfield will return as will Jannie and Louw will be retained.