Stormers run out of puff
Highly ranked Cape franchise ticks all boxes, but fails to clinch games when chips are down
THE Stormers, according to one comprehensive statistical study, are the most successful SA Super Rugby franchise in history and the third-best team in the competition.
Yet, as the competition moves into its 19th year, they have won no titles.
According to the respected website Pick and Go, at which uses the same model as the IRB’s test-ranking system, the Stormers’ average ranking score is 84.7966 since the tournament started as the Super 12 in 1996.
The Crusaders, with seven titles, top the list with a score of 86.2547 and the Chiefs, who have won the past two tournaments, are second on 85.9745. The three-time champion Bulls are fourth (84.7088).
Consistent performances, settled management, a strong squad with a happy culture and great leadership in Jean de Villiers and Schalk Burger hasn’t been enough to take the Stormers over the line.
They’ve recruited Argentinian lock Manuel Carizza to add experience and international class to the second row, but it was the only significant signing during the off-season.
It’s “as you were” in terms of their personnel and, therefore, approach. History tells us that hasn’t been enough.
They have had the meanest, most miserly defence in the competition for the past four years. And, as all top coaches say, “defence wins tournaments”. The Stormers are the anomaly to that maxim.
They can’t win the games that count and part of the reason is that they don’t come from behind when it matters.
“The Stormers have the ability to be one of the best counter-attacking teams because they create pressure, but, from an attacking viewpoint, technically they can be very frontal with ball in hand,” said former All Black coach and rugby analyst John Mitchell.
“That means players get double-tackled and, as a consequence, they get slow ball at rucks, which stunts their attack. They can get away with it in pool games but, when teams are more desperate, of a higher quality and more focused in playoffs, their counter-attack doesn’t always reap the same rewards.”
In the 2010 Super Rugby final in Orlando, the Bulls raced into a 16-0 lead after 24 minutes against a nervouslooking Stormers. The contest was over four minutes into the second quarter, with the Bulls ultimately winning 25-17.
In the 2011 semifinal against the Crusaders at Newlands,
They can’t win the games that count and don’t come from behind
the Stormers fell 13-3 behind by the 20th minute. They slumped to a 29-10 loss.
In the 2012 semifinal against the Sharks at Newlands, the same pattern continued. The Sharks led 13-3 after 34 minutes. The Stormers couldn’t come back and fell to a 26-19 loss.
“A lot of their attack is based on the premise of ‘we don’t mind defending for six or eight phases before isolating you and turning the ball over’,” Mitchell said.
“But what the Sharks, Reds and Crusaders have done in recent seasons is deny the Stormers the ability to come forward to anything. The Crusaders did it with ball in hand, the Reds with ball in hand and kicking behind the defensive line, and so did the Sharks.
“As a result, the Stormers got frustrated and didn’t engage in an arm-wrestle on their terms. They became ragged because they couldn’t turn defence into attack as they’d like.
“Also, it appears that a safety-first and defensive mind-set has crept in. Do they have enough ideas from middle management [assistant coaches] to take them forward and change that?”
The Cape side have a tough tour, with away games to the Crusaders, Chiefs, Brumbies and Reds. Those come after only two matches in SA — away to the Lions and home to the Hurricanes.
It doesn’t get much harder than that on the road and, to be playoff contenders, a minimum of 12 out of a possible 20 points on tour is vital. A poor tour would put the Stormers on the back foot before the halfway point in the campaign. prospect of playing with, and against, Victor Matfield.