Once again, opponents appear to have declared open season on Richie McCaw, long a target for unfair attention, writes Gregor Paul
The first significant act of Super Rugby 2015 was an atrocity committed against Richie McCaw.
It would be a reasonable guess to predict the last significant act of 2015 will be an atrocity against McCaw.
Between now and then, chunks will be taken out of him - hit men and hot-heads will be lining him up because it's become accepted in rugby circles that physical sabotage is the best and only way to deal with him.
It's been this way for a while but will be worse in World Cup year. There's something about World Cups - they act as a full moon, set the unhinged howling at their shadow.
September and October will almost certainly be McCaw's last stand, and he will be, because he always is, the most influential player at the tournament. Everyone knows that - not just New Zealanders. Remember 2011 and how he dragged his team through the final on one leg, how he was able to torment the French at nearly every breakdown and avoid sanction?
Remember, also, how he was eye-gouged by Aurelien Rougerie in the final minutes and how the IRB had no interest investigating the incident?
Those who like the moneyball philosophy will have seen the odds of being punished for a cheap shot on McCaw are about 50:50 - probably more 60:40 against. Dylan Hartley, Quade Cooper, Rougerie and Andy Powell landed major blows and walked away Scot-free. Others such as Dean Grey-ling and Dannie Rossouw were barely punished for similarly nasty attacks.
It doesn't seem to matter to anyone that roughing up McCaw doesn't work. With one exception in 2011, when he went looking for Cooper, he doesn't dwell on it. After the game, he says nothing about the cheap shots. He'll sit there, his face raw, the damage obvious, and just shrug - say it is for the judiciary to sort things out.
Those who slugged him are left dealing with their actions long after. McCaw moves on quickly and it's not clear why the cheap shots continue, other than to hypothesise that teams around the world have possibly run out of other legitimate options and that maybe they also think that at some stage the accumulative onslaught will have an effect.
McCaw doesn't have to push the boundaries these days to rile opponents - 16 seasons in the professional game have been enough for his peers to reach fixed conclusions.
Opponents have gone way beyond caring whether McCaw is legal or illegal in his actions.
The internet can worry about that.
All McCaw's opponents know is that he will, somehow, appear in unusual positions. They know he will find a way to be exactly where teams don't want him to be. And he'll have arrived there via a route that will most likely have seen him flit between offside and onside in the blink of an eye, leaving the referee unsure what to do.
That's his genius. Referees have a brief to only penalise the clear and obvious and he is neither. He operates in the netherlands and the fact he's the most decorated and experienced player in the game - RH McCaw, All Black captain - makes it a giant test of any referee's nerve to penalise him.
Typically, what has happened in the past is McCaw does his thing - teams stand back and leave it to the referee to sort out, that doesn't happen so frustration builds and someone snaps and tries to fix matters themselves.
The pattern has changed, though, in the past 18 months. No one waits for the referee. All faith in officialdom has been lost. They take the precaution of starting the game frustrated and the rough stuff comes early.
In military speak, most teams now appear to have a shoot-on-sight policy with McCaw.
The justification seems to be that, as McCaw apparently plays to a different set of rules to everyone else, he should be subjected to a similarly different set of rules.
That much had become obvious in the second half of last year when South Africa, Australia, England, Scotland and Wales had zero tolerance for the No 7. McCaw was shoved and thrown out the way. There was over-the-top gesticulating to referees about where McCaw was and what he was doing and it looked like teams had decided to be proactive in their management of him.
That theory surely gathered strength when Rebels halfback Nic Stirzaker didn't need to put his boots anywhere near McCaw in the opening exchanges of last week's game in Christchurch. But, clearly, some cognitive process occurred. Stirzaker saw McCaw, prostrate, exposed, vulnerable and knew that was an opportunity to take. So up went the leg, down came the boot and off went Stirzaker. Later in the same game, Scott Higginbotham, who has previous with McCaw, tried to jump over some bodies as he entered a ruck. His boot made contact with the All Black skipper's head. Adam Casselden, the judicial hearing chairman, was persuaded it was accidental.
Everyone is entitled to a fair hearing but it's beyond coincidence that McCaw has been the target of so many of these grey-areas incidents.
Keeping track of who has done what to McCaw over the years is a challenge. There have been at least 15 major incidents when the perpetrator has either been carded or cited and who knows how many more that escaped the attention of the cameras?
There are so many curious factors to this treatment of McCaw. The fact it is so easy to get away with bashing him suggests there may be an element within officialdom who feel McCaw deserves what he gets.
There hasn't really been any sense that the repeated and callous targeting of McCaw is causing any concern in global administrative circles.
In 2006, All Blacks coach Graham Henry said he was troubled at the way his best players - McCaw and Dan Carter - were being hunted. He said it after McCaw was the victim of a Lote Tuqiri spear tackle and Carter had been hit late several times off the ball. There was outrage from offshore commentators who felt it was precious and hypocritical.
From as early as the fourth minute of this year's Super Rugby competition, it was made obvious that McCaw is going to be subjected to an unprecedented volume of physical abuse.
His finish line is in sight. He knows he has to endure this for only another eight months and then can walk away But, likewise, his opponents know they have only another eight months to do what they can to stop him from signing off as the first man to captain a team to consecutive World Cups.