I'm still baffled at the suggestion that South Africa were ever anywhere close to winning the first or second tests in that series. The third certainly, South Africa were in a great position until the rain, and could possibly have won the match, and would almost certainly have drawn it had Smith not pushed for an unlikely win.
South Africa were in the game for a few days in Perth certainly, but they had to chase almost 500 in the 4th innings and the only possible positive outcome they could have managed was a draw. Sure Hodge was dropped early on in his double century, but he was hardly the only contributer in Australia's second innings total of 528. And to blame a dropped catch for a guy making 200 is simply absurd, it's not like they didn't have another 300+ balls with which to get him out.
And Australia were very clearly the better team in the second test, and were never behind at any stage after Hussey's ridiculously good innings.
Also, the first two tests of the South African home series were absolute hammerings. Australia weren't far from winning the first test by an innings, and the best South Africa ever could have managed in the second was a draw, if they hadn't fallen apart to Warne. And, incidentally, your arguments about the rain in Sydney would surely apply there as well. If all 450 overs had been bowled, Australia would have won the second test without breaking a sweat, rather than cutting it close on the 5th evening.