39 to 19 is a shellacking any day of the week, but in a qualifying final, away from home, it was a truly historic thrashing that the Brumbies claimed against the Stormers.
The Brumbies played the rugby I wish they’d played more of ever since 2013, when they galvanised as a unit and had the composure and strength needed to win a championship.
Yes, there have been glimpses of that form but against the Stormers they tried things from the very beginning.
They moved the ball laterally and looked to attack the blindside with quick ball movements and fast feet. Nic White didn’t sit on the ball, Christian Lealiifano moved it and the forwards either recycled or drove forward around the ruck quickly.
I hinted before the match the Brumbies could cause a boil over if they remembered they have devastating attacking players available such as Henry Speight and Joe Tomane. Thankfully they got Tomane the ball early and often. He did the rest, making defenders look slow and weak in his wake. But the movements that led to some of his tries deserve team-wide praise. Tomane was the beneficiary of purposeful support play and able offloading for phases before he crossed the paint.
Without the ball, the Brumbies were strong and David Pocock quietly had one of his more disruptive days. Before you even get to Scott Fardy and the rest of the pack, Pocock had taken away the Stormers’ patterns and momentum. The result was a Stormers team that couldn’t establish continuity or find a groove. Their possessions looked like junior rugby – quickly out of ideas if they couldn’t bash through.
The sole bright spot for the Stormers was Damien de Allende. The few times he had the ball in space he was an absolute handful to bring down. Basically, he was as good as he has been all year. He is one of the in-form South African players right now; I shudder at the thought of him crashing through the Wallabies midfield.
The low spot for the Brumbies is Speight’s red and almost certain long-ish suspension (as I write this he has been found guilty but no sanction has been determined).
So, just how good was the Brumbies victory over the Stormers in Cape Town, historically speaking?
I went back 10 seasons to try and put their dominant away win in perspective.
2014
Last year the home side won every single finals match. One, two and four-point losses in the final and qualifiers were as close as it got. Between those relatively close matches were comfortable 18 and 26-point home side wins to the Waratahs and Crusaders in the semi-finals.
This might indicate the second week in the finals, including some travel for the Sharks before their thumping against the Crusaders, is even tougher to remain competitive.
2013
The only away win in the finals was the Brumbies’ semi-final win over the Bulls. So the Brumbies have some form in this area, clearly, and retain a fair whack of the squad that pulled off this feat a few years ago. Their victory certainly gets some points for style, being that it was a semi-final, whereas the last weekend was just a qualifying final. However they only snuck past the Bulls 26-23, so that doesn’t rate as highly.
2012
The Sharks romped over the Reds 30-17 at Suncorp Stadium and, looking back on it, started the slide to where the Queenslanders find themselves now. In that game the Sharks were swarming, irresistible and composed enough to keep the scoreboard ticking over – they played the quintessential away game.
The Brumbies’ win last weekend was more dominant, but the Sharks run to the final in three away fixtures, including that seriously good win in Queensland, ranks right up there in history.
2011
Just one away win, as the Crusaders beat the Stormers 29-10 at Cape Town in the semi-finals. That was a very strong victory, of which the Brumbies’ win was reminiscent, but came off the back of a Dan Carter field day with the boot – he kicked five penalties and two conversions – rather than six tries like the Brumbies managed. Not the same.
2010
No away wins in the finals.
2009
The Chiefs got flogged 67-10 trying to get an away win at Loftus Versfeld against the Bulls in South Africa. Again, this isn’t easy.
2008
No away wins again. The biggest win of the finals was the Waratahs 15-point win when the Sharks travelled to Sydney. Tough gig this away winning business.
2007
We have an away winner! The Bulls won their first of three titles in four years away against the Sharks in Durban. The final 20-19 score line fell the Bulls way because Percy Montgomery’s two missed conversions kept the Bulls close enough for Bryan Habana’s 82nd minute try to be the winner. An all-time grand final victory and because it was a decider it has to be considered one of the best away wins of all time.
Does that make up for how close it was compared to the Brumbies thrashing?
2006
Back to no away wins.
2005
No one won away in the finals in 2005.
I’m stopping now. The 20-point margin of victory, the travel to Cape Town, the six tries scored, the manner in which they continued to roll the scoreboard along and not let the game get close, the ease – all of that means the Brumbies secured one of Super Rugby’s greatest away finals wins on the weekend.
Possibly the Sharks rolling the Reds and the Bulls winning the final away from home are the two best comparisons for their own levels of difficulty.
There are two weeks of finals left, and the Brumbies have a chance to repeat those heroics against the Hurricanes. History says they won’t be able to, but that doesn’t mean we can’t savour what they’ve already achieved.
Jerry
Guest
It's a very good win, but hard to compare against other years because other years didn't feature a team as poor as the Stormers being given a home final.
Mapu
Guest
Canes to dominate and win mate.no worries.well maybe a little bit lol.cant wait!
Mapu
Guest
He hates the untouchable success that is NZ rugby.Full stop.
Mapu
Guest
He is very even with chips on both
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Moderator's code of conduct? How about you stop telling people what to do. "Just because it was 2011 does not make every game of the Crusaders epic." -- there's a pot shot "Every win by the 2011 crusaders seems to be amazing and best ever now." -- there's another one. This "who me?" act wears thin.
Pinetree
Guest
Just to add on to my last comment, another noteworthy away win was the Sharks beaing the Reds in Aus in the 1996 playoff by 43-25, which must rate close to the Brumbies performance last weekend with an 18 point margin, and defeating the top ranked team in the round robin.
Taylorman
Guest
Well if it's about relativity ex then that's probably true, the brumbies, given the circs was a very good win. Overall the best result remains the the 2000 final where the second place crusaders beat the table topping brumbies in Canberra. The only overseas finals win, done at the home of the pool winners, and it's the most meritorious...the title. Leaves every other away example for dead, regardless of whether the article doesn't include it.
PeterK
Roar Guru
OJ - Also as per the moderators code of conduct, stop playing the man and play the ball. The focus should be on the topic at hand instead of me.
PeterK
Roar Guru
OJ - True. I have not said derogatory comments against the 2011 Crusaders, unless my saying that the Reds were the better team and deserved to win the 2011 title is derogatory (which it seems to be to a lot of kiwis). I have disagreed with some crusaders fans perspectives and arguments that they put forward, that is not derogatory of the crusaders. I have said I have issues with the cynical play of the crusaders for many years, but this is not specific to the 2011 version.
Pinetree
Guest
The Brumbies defeated the Waratahs in a semefinal in Sydney 51-10 in 2002 as well. Interestingly, the Waratahs played a B team the week before, and rested most of their players when they played the Saders, and were thrashed. The Stormers also rested most of their players a week before, and got soundly beaten. Maybe not such a great idea to rest players a week before playoffs?
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Yes, you've never said anything denigrating about the 2011 Crusaders. Not a hobby horse of yours clearly.
PeterK
Roar Guru
It is about relativities. crusaders were a better side than than the stormers , they were the stronger team, they had beaten the stormers at the stormers home ground. So a stronger team beating a weaker team where they had already beaten them that year is not that big an accomplishment. Brumbies had performed worse over the season, they were the weaker team by results and bookies, they were beaten by that team in the round robin. So it was a slightly bigger accomplishment than the crusaders win. Also the manner of the win of the brumbies 6 tries to 1 made it an even greater accomplishment.
Taylorman
Guest
So? They were still the two worst sides, they certainly weren't the best two.
PeterK
Roar Guru
stormers had more wins and rested all their players in their last loss. Their record is better than the brumbies.
Taylorman
Guest
Stormers finished seventh, were promoted to third through administrative purposes and were without vermulens and burger. Brumbies were sixth. It was simply the best of the two worst performing teams. I don't see how that rates higher than those who finished higher.
PeterK
Roar Guru
OJ - On the contrary I have nothing against the 2011 crusaders. I was not denigrating them, I said they were a very strong team did I not? Just because I thought the brumbies win was more substantial. Just because I thought the reds were the deserved 2011 winners and better team does not mean I am against that side. Some of the fans statements about them I disagree with thats all.
Taylorman
Guest
What are the odds?
ohtani's jacket
Guest
The Crusaders are not my team. I am from Auckland. The Stormers lost to a "few" NZ teams along the way... a few meaning the Chiefs in Hamilton (their only road loss of the season) and the Crusaders at Newlands. I don't know how you even use terms like "most of their losses" when they only lost 4 times (the same amount as the Crusaders fwiw.) So what if the Crusaders topped the NZ conference? The Stormers topped the SA conference and finished higher. Victory over a better team is worth more than victory over a poor one. The Stormers on form shouldn't have even been in the finals. NZ should have had four sides. Nevertheless, a knockout win in the Republic is a knockout win in the Republic and I don't want to take too much away from the Brumbies just because it's one of your lifelong missions to denigrate anything positive about the 2011 Crusaders.
Aidan Loveridge
Roar Pro
I was really disappointed i wanted to see a Saffa team in the semis and stormers were the last hope they're better than how they played that night so many mistakes mixed with flashes of brilliance and after that tighthead at the end i couldnt be more disappointed
PeterK
Roar Guru
No read what I said. ================================================== Crusaders were a very strong team. They finished top of the NZ conference. Stormers were not that strong losing to a few nz teams along the way. ==================================================== The statement was Stormers were not that strong , was following the statement of how strong the crusaders were, so it was in comparision, the point being made how they lost to a few NZ sides, and crusaders topped the nz conference. Reds just were better than the crusaders, thats all. Of course you Crusaders ahead they are your team. The facts. Crusaders were a stronger team. They had already beaten the stormers at home. They were the strongest NZ team , yet most of Stormers losses were to NZ teams. Brumbies were the 2nd best Aussie team. They were 6th. They had already lost to the Stormers. Bookies had it as an upset.