The All Blacks sing the national anthem before playing the Wallabies at Eden Park. Photo / Dean Purcell.
Whisper this - lest we be accused of Kiwi hubris - but 2015 must be the best chance yet for the All Blacks to finally win the Rugby World Cup overseas.
Those clapping a hand over your eyes and running off to hide in the pantry at the sheer, disaster-inducing cheek of all this can relax.
Any discussion of All Black chances at a Rugby World Cup comes with the built-in caveat that the evil troll who lives under the World Cup bridge, emerging every four years to devour New Zealand's hopes, is alive and well and sharpening his canines.
This time it seems a little different because not many of the likely alternatives seem all that flash. In that category, we can place England and the old enemy, South Africa.
Everyone, including me, has previously hailed England as one of the viable threats to the All Blacks.
Five of the seven World Cups thus far have seen the hosts make the final. That may still happen but the selection of the England squad and a worrying loss to France (for all the dubious value of warm-up tests) have made England seem less of a danger.
For various reasons, their comparatively inexperienced squad does not include powerful midfielder Manu Tuilagi, volatile New Zealand-born hooker Dylan Hartley, creative but difficult first five-eighths Danny Cipriani and last year's European Player of the Year, loose forward Steffon Armitage.
It includes former South Sydney NRL forward Sam Burgess as a centre, even though he has played only six games there and his club field him at No 8.
Only the England selectors appear to think he is a World Cup centre and he will likely play only a bit part, which makes you wonder why he was chosen at all.
The former four were all dropped for disciplinary or face-doesn't-fit reasons (Armitage plays in France, making him ineligible). England have echoed the All Blacks cry "better men make better players" but it's hard to shake the feeling those four were better players than the 'better men' who replaced them.
Home advantage is a boon. It can also be a barely tolerable burden and England have to fight their way out of a pool that contains Australia and Wales, not to mention Fiji.
South Africa have a different problem. The coloured community say there are not enough black players. The extreme end of the white community say there are too many and they affect the quality of the team.
Others, after a winless Rugby Championship campaign, say coach Heyneke Meyer has selected a 'Dad's Army' full of old war horses better off left in the stables with a bucket of carrots.
A fringe political party failed with a legal bid to ban the Boks from the World Cup, alleging "racially biased and exclusionary methods" of selection violated the constitution (translation: not enough black players).
Meanwhile, a party supported mostly by Afrikaaners said "political interference" (translation: too many black players making up a politically acceptable quota) was weakening the team by preventing better white players from being chosen.
The Congress of South African Trade Unions called the Boks (with eight black players) the "most representative" of any Springbok team so far but also said five black and two white Springboks had complained to them blacks were being unfairly sidelined.
"The lack of black players ... has reached a crisis. There is a white cabal who still try to control the rugby team and who get to play in it. The Boer mafia insists on putting their old crocks into the team when there are clearly much better black and white players outside the team."
Mixed up in all this are players like flanker Siya Kolisi - selected ahead of highly-rated whites Heinrich Brussow and Marcel Coetzee - fullback Zane Kirchner and halfback Rudi Paige, whom critics all accuse of making up the (racial) numbers.
This could all benefit the Boks. There is no group of rugby players in the world more comfortable with (and able to grow within) a siege mentality. But it does seem the conservative Meyer has gone for old guard instead of young blood.
So if not South Africa and England, who? Australia - even with Quade Cooper.
Coach Michael Cheika didn't exactly tank the last test against the All Blacks but he undeniably kept some powder dry. Australia traditionally play the All Blacks well and, by keeping something in reserve, the Wallabies have preserved some vital mental strength for when they next meet.
Ireland, too - never past the quarter-finals before, they have a settled and efficient team, play the tight stuff well and, with a lot of Gaelic football backgrounds, are adept at the high-ball game. In the last year, they have beaten South Africa, Australia, England and France.
They are in the same pool as France who have shown at successive World Cups they can build during the tournament and overcome many obstacles including, ahem, the All Blacks.
The good news is, if France/Ireland and Australia win their groups, they are not drawn to meet the All Blacks until the final.
If you can call that good news.