(1) Intuition for why SST=SSR+SSE
When we try to explain the total variation in Y (SST) with one explanatory variable, X, then there are exactly two sources of variability. First, there is the variability captured by X (Sum Square Regression), and second, there is the variability not captured by X (Sum Square Error). Hence, SST=SSR+SSE (exact equality).
(2) Geometric intuition
Please see the first few pictures here (especially the third): https://sites.google.com/site/modernprogramevaluation/variance-and-bias
Some of the total variation in the data (distance from datapoint to Y¯) is captured by the regression line (the distance from the regression line to Y¯) and error (distance from the point to the regression line). There's not room left for SST to be greater than SSE+SSR.
(3) The problem with your illustration
You can't look at SSE and SSR in a pointwise fashion. For a particular point, the residual may be large, so that there is more error than explanatory power from X. However, for other points, the residual will be small, so that the regression line explains a lot of the variability. They will balance out and ultimately SST=SSR+SSE. Of course this is not rigorous, but you can find proofs like the above.
Also notice that regression will not be defined for one point: b1=∑(Xi−X¯)(Yi−Y¯)∑(Xi−X¯)2, and you can see that the denominator will be zero, making estimation undefined.
Hope this helps.
--Ryan M.