McCaw eyes Super Rugby revenge vs Bulls
Related coverage
- Canterbury Crusaders news
- Rugby Union news
- Super Rugby news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
All Blacks and Crusaders captain Richie McCaw rarely finds himself on a losing side, but his last three appearances against the Bulls in the Super Rugby play-offs have all ended in defeat.
But all those losses, in 2007, 2009 and 2010, were on South African soil and McCaw is hoping home-ground advantage will help ensure the Crusaders come out on the right side of the ledger on Saturday night in Christchurch.
“I probably owe them one. We’ve had some tough old battles over the years, but this is a new year,” said McCaw after the Crusaders’ final practice on Thursday.
McCaw, who will play at No.8 after fellow All Black Kieran Read was ruled out with a rib injury, said the home advantage meant nothing if the Crusaders dropped their standards.
“You still have to do the job right and you can’t go out thinking that it is going to be easier.”
He anticipated the Bulls might find the going tough as the match wore on and the travel took its toll.
Ominously for the Bulls, they have lost their past seven visits to Christchurch.
But both McCaw and coach Todd Blackadder said the hosts need to keep their discipline, wary that ace Bulls goalkicker Morne Steyn will punish any indiscretions.
“The experience we’ve had over the last few years is that he keeps things ticking along just through our ill discipline. Anywhere in your own half and it is fairly much three points guaranteed,” McCaw said.
McCaw said the Bulls would play an uncomplicated brand of rugby suited to the knockout phase.
“They’re not real subtle how they approach it – they try and get on top physically and they can kick the ball from anywhere.”
Blackadder has made three changes to the side that swamped the Western Force last week, with All Blacks prop Ben Franks dropped to the bench.
Six-cap All Black Wyatt Crockett replaces Franks at loosehead prop while international lock Sam Whitelock returns after being rested last week.
Powerful centre Robbie Fruean is restored to the run-on side with Adam Whitelock bumped out to the wing, relegating Sean Maitland to the reserves.
© AAP 2013Crusaders: Israel Dagg, Adam Whitelock, Robbie Fruean, Ryan Crotty, Zac Guildford, Dan Carter, Andy Ellis, Richie McCaw (capt), Matt Todd, George Whitelock, Sam Whitelock, Luke Romano, Owen Franks, Corey Flynn, Wyatt Crockett. Res: Quentin MacDonald, Ben Franks, Tom Donnelly, Luke Whitelock, Willi Heinz, Tom Taylor, Sean Maitland.
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Crusaders, Richie McCaw, Rugby Union, Super Rugby



July 20th 2012 @ 4:47am
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 4:47am | Report comment
Well, you wouldn’t really expect anything less from the Crusaders would you?
July 20th 2012 @ 5:17am
mania said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:17am | Report comment
morning biltongbek – your predictions for the weekend? how do u see the saffa teams doing?
July 20th 2012 @ 5:47am
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:47am | Report comment
Morning Sir, the Crusaders will beat the Bulls comfortably, I am hoping the Sharks can do it, but not confident they can.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:59am
mania said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:59am | Report comment
dunno about comfortably but yes my $’s on the saders. if the saders get an early lead then it would be an easy win as i dont see the bulls as a come from behind, scoring long range tries, kind of team. however if bulls take the lead they will strangle possession and make very difficult for the saders to play their brand of rugby.
i’m assuming sharks can do it but then reds have that xFactor and form during the round robins means nothing now.
July 20th 2012 @ 10:36am
Ryan said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:36am | Report comment
I’m going with the Crusaders over the Bulls but I think it will be close.
I am also going to pick the Reds simply because they are playing at home but I think it will be close, the Reds form bar the Chiefs win has been nothing to get too excited about especially when you take into consideration who they have played since.
July 20th 2012 @ 3:07pm
Sluggy said | July 20th 2012 @ 3:07pm | Report comment
Agree the ‘saders probably favourites, but I do not see a blow out – think it will be close.
Likewise the other game, home side favoured, with (some) injured stars back, to reverse the result from Durban earlier in the season.
July 20th 2012 @ 6:04am
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:04am | Report comment
Yeah, the only positive for the Sharks is the last two weekends they have upped their intensity and hae some momentum coming into this match, they won’t go away from this match wondering, I think their loss three weks ago against the Lions have given them a wake up call
July 20th 2012 @ 6:06am
mania said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:06am | Report comment
sharks may have timed their peaking perfectly. time’ll tell
July 20th 2012 @ 10:52am
Ryan said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
The Sharks have beaten the Stormers, Bulls and Cheetahs in their last four matches but have also lost to the Lions
The Sharks have lost 5 of their away matches this year one of which was against the Tahs the other a thumping by the Hurricanes, they did however beat the Brumbies and the Blues however the later was right in the middle of their major injury crisis.
On a side note they have only lost one match at home this year and that was to the Chiefs but this was on the back of travelling home from New Zeland and it was only by 6 points.
Keeping in mind the Sharks did not play the Crusaders this year (as yet) they have beaten all the other finalists at home.
In hindsight with their home record I’m sure those who pushed for this system will be kicking themselves about now.
July 20th 2012 @ 7:39am
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 7:39am | Report comment
Morning gentlemen,
Crusaders too strong at home for the Bulls, even without Read. If they can control their discipline and limit Morne’s ability to punish them they should win comfortably.
Reds and Sharks a more difficult pick. With Cooper out and the Sharks having some ascendency in recent weeks I would have backed them. But without Lambie and Steyn they lose some valuable playmaking and with the Suncorp factor they will struggle.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:52am
Brett McKay said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Agree with that Riccardo – for me, it’s a matter of Lambie and Steyn being bigger losses than Cooper, with all other things being relatively equal. Home advantage a big help. obviously..
July 20th 2012 @ 1:40pm
Suzy Poison said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Agree with all posters, I don’t give the Bulls any hope of an upset. The Crusaders to win easily.
Then you would have to back the Reds at Suncorp. They are bookies favourites and rightly so at Suncorp.
But they won’t have it all their way.
A couple of things, for me, show the Sharks have a great opportunity for an upset.
1. Stats show the Red aren’t the same team without Cooper. The Reds have only won 50% of their games without Cooper, and all of losses were when Cooper wasn’t playing. Lucas has only had one good game against the Chiefs, a lot will depend on how he handles the pressure.
2. The Stormers showed the Sharks how to win at SunCorp. Their 23-13 victory was the blueprint. Brutal defence and big ball carriers to sap the energy of the lightweight Reds pack. Without Quade this Reds team, is not as confident. When Quade is on the park, you can almost sense the confidence that oozes from the Reds.
3. The Reds have struggled against the big Saffa packs this year, with the Stormers, Sharks and the Bulls especially giving them a touch up. This Sharks pack is better than any of the other Saffa teams. The Reds pack really, considering how many Wallabies, has promised a lot and not delivered.
4. With Alberts playing in the second row, Bismark great at forcing turnovers and then the Free ranging Kankowski, Daniels and Coetzee ready to pounce, the Sharks are in fact playing with five loose forwards. All of these Sharks players played for the Boks this year, so if you include Beast and Jannie Du Plessis, this is a very scary unit. Without a doubt the Reds forwards will need to fight fire with fire.
5. The Reds have the edge in the backline, but games are won up front, and the Sharks pack (The same pack that gave the Bulls a working over) has the edge over the Reds. If the Reds can gain parity in forwards, there stars outside backs can be lethal. I for one don’t think the Reds will get quality ball, and that Lucas is up against a quality player, French International Michelak, and may struggle.
But home advantage and the support of the passionate crowd will be enough, for the Reds to sneak home, by 3 points?
July 20th 2012 @ 3:08pm
stuff happens said | July 20th 2012 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Agree with you SuzyP. One other point, teams that beat the Reds, or the Wallabies for that matter, work out how to smother Will Genia’s influence on the game. Not easy, he’s in great form; but if they don’t the Sharks could be chasing the game & it’ll be too much for them in the last 1/4.You’re right their ‘Bok forwards have to do the business until they drop.
Could be a great game; both teams play open attacking rugby.
July 20th 2012 @ 3:57pm
moaman said | July 20th 2012 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
I reckon the Sharks can do it.
July 20th 2012 @ 4:37pm
Sluggy said | July 20th 2012 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
I can see Genia putting Digby and Higginbotham through the holes in the Sharks inside defence off third/fourth phase. As someone said, they will try and shut Genia down, but that also gives him the chance to pull them a couple of metres wider and create the gap.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:12pm
Carnivean said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:12pm | Report comment
It’s hard to really say that they struggled with QC, when for significant portions of that same period they were without any quality in the middle of the field. They will have a far more settled lineup for this game than in that period, and one that is frankly much higher quality overall, despite not having QC.
Also, the Reds have thrived against SA teams in general, when not imploding under injuries.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:31pm
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
Maybe last year, this year they have lost to the Stormers, Sharks and Bulls.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:40pm
Carnivean said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:40pm | Report comment
Sharks they were up, then lost their midfield. Bulls was the next week, and they were a shattered team at that point. They even lost badly to the Force the next week. The Stormers game they fielded a debutant at 10, and he broke in minutes, and their backup was barely club level.
During that period they were a completely different team to the team they are at the moment, so comparing results from then to now is misleading. Yes the forward pack is largely the same, but teams get steered around the park, create opportunites, and build pressure from their 10. The Reds barely had a 10, so they couldn’t build any pressure nor create opportunities.
I’d say that last year is a better representation of what the Reds are currently capable of, and that team beat all the SA teams it played. QC is a step above Lucas, but a Genia-Lucas combo is still closer to 2011 than 2012 during the injury period.
July 20th 2012 @ 6:02pm
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:02pm | Report comment
All teams suffer due to injury, the Stormers have been without their first choice backrow the entire season, the sharks played half their mathces without Lambie and Alberts, the Bulls were lucky as far as injuries go.
The point you made is the reds thrived against the SA teams, but the reality is they didn’t, injury considered or not.
July 20th 2012 @ 6:33pm
Carnivean said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:33pm | Report comment
I’m mainly only claiming that it’s misleading to look at the games where the Reds didn’t have QC, because they also didn’t have other people in vital positions. That team and the the team that play on Saturday are radically different in terms of potential.
I made a claim that they play well against SA teams in general, and I still hold that, apart from their injury driven terrible patch, they do play well against them. Much better than against Aus and NZ teams. I even included the proviso regarding injury situations to show my intention here.
July 20th 2012 @ 6:45pm
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:45pm | Report comment
Sure, understood
July 20th 2012 @ 1:41pm
Dan said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
Gonna have to back the Reds here… I actually think no Cooper may be a blessing in disguise for the Reds. The guy has some great flamboyant attacking skills, but has so often proved a liability in big matches (though admittedly last years SR Final wasn’t one of them). It’s also worth remembering that the Reds started their mid season streak without Cooper.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:43pm
Carnivean said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
That’s a perception that was built up from his Wallaby matches. His Reds form in big matches was outstanding, and noone ever even hinted that he was a big game liability.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:04am
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:04am | Report comment
McCaw should stop talking about revenge and just get down and do it.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:21am
moaman said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:21am | Report comment
” I probably owe them one” seems pretty mild,to me Jiggles. Don’t be fooled by the headline mate.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:28am
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:28am | Report comment
Considering the Bulls have had the wood on them for a few years I suggest he shouldn’t say anything and just focus on his job.
July 20th 2012 @ 12:02pm
Brett McKay said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
It’s a pretty quiet build up then Jigs, if no-one says anything beforehand…
July 20th 2012 @ 12:21pm
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
Sorry Brett. Judging by NZ comments in the past, apparently players can’t talk about up coming games if they haven’t had recent success against that same opponent…
July 20th 2012 @ 12:51pm
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:51pm | Report comment
Not correct Jiggs and I’m one of those posters you refer to.
What we have alluded to is the tendency of Wallaby greats or luminaries touting victory prior to a match or series only to be beaten.
I hope all parties talk about up coming games. It adds to the occasion and is part of the anticipation…
July 20th 2012 @ 1:24pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Here Here Jiggles, cant agree with you more, now if we can just get the Wallabies to agree with you they may just start knocking the AB’s off!
July 20th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
It’s probably a bit tough to ‘get down to it’ when you’re talking to reporters after practice. It’s not as if McCaw is saying this on twitter.
July 20th 2012 @ 3:55pm
Kuruki said | July 20th 2012 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
“Considering the Bulls have had the wood on them for a few years I suggest he shouldn’t say anything and just focus on his job.”
The Bulls have lost there past 7 visits to Christchurch.
July 20th 2012 @ 12:00pm
KiwiDave said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Crusaders very rarely lose finals at home. They will be up for this match. Bulls for me are the pick of the South African sides so they will fight hard but with only Read missing, the Crusaders will be ominous here.
Agree with another poster, Lambie and Steyn will be much bigger losses than Cooper. The Sharks will struggle without these two.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:09pm
Cantab said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:09pm | Report comment
Any idea what the crusaders home finals record is? I can’t ever remember them dropping a finals game at home…but I’m sure they would have.
July 20th 2012 @ 3:55pm
moaman said | July 20th 2012 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
“….However, any thoughts of the Pretorian side having superiority in the head to head record can be countered when you look at the Crusaders record against South African sides at home – they have played 41 games, winning 37 of them. The Bulls have lost eight of nine away games in the fixture with the only victory occurring in 1996. The Canterbury side have also won all 13 home ties in play-offs, semi-finals or finals and have only lost more than two home games in a season once – back in 1996. If you also take into account the fact that the home team has won in 41/50 knock-out games in the history of the competition and that the Crusaders have contested 10 of the 16 finals, it’s clear why they have been made big favourites. …”
That,courtesy of Planet Rugby;I can’t vouch for the accuracy but interesting anyway and hope it helps.
July 20th 2012 @ 2:59pm
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
The Bulls haven’t been great away from home this year, they got bested by all the NZ teams axcept the Crusaders who they managed to just beat at home.
Sharks for me has a good chance, Bulls no chance
July 20th 2012 @ 12:39pm
AndyS said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
All form and capabilities of the sides apart, if nothing else it will be nice to have all the kiwis getting behind the Reds. Should make for a harmonious pub, at least ’til full time.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:01pm
justsaying said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
Gee I dunno, I wouldn’t mind seeing the Reds go down. The fact that they are still in the running after all that has happened makes them one of the more dangerous teams, in my opinion.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:11pm
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
Assuming the Reds get past the Sharks intact their next assignment in Hamilton is very difficult indeed. The Chiefs are waiting and desparate to attone for their last couple of unfortunate weekends…
July 20th 2012 @ 5:09pm
Dan said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:09pm | Report comment
47 to 27 ring a bell??
July 20th 2012 @ 6:16pm
Kuruki said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:16pm | Report comment
Hamilton is not Brisbane. And home advantage in finals is huge as history tells us.
July 20th 2012 @ 7:10pm
Big Boppa said | July 20th 2012 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
Reds have beaten the Chiefs in their last two visits to Hamilton in 2010 and 2011 – with many of thier players missing as well
July 20th 2012 @ 9:07pm
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:07pm | Report comment
No, it doesn’t.
(it was 42-27. And it wasn’t in Hamilton).
July 20th 2012 @ 1:26pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
Crusaders may do it a bit tougher than most people are thinking however should get home in a close one and I think the ‘Shorks’ will end the Reds season.
July 20th 2012 @ 4:00pm
moaman said | July 20th 2012 @ 4:00pm | Report comment
I’m with you on this one.
July 20th 2012 @ 4:48pm
chuck said | July 20th 2012 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
That shark pack is loaded with mongrel and that where their strength is the little french general should not be taken lightly MICHALAK he will steer them around the park without lambie at the controls MICHALAK is a good replacement it should be a good game just that
I tend to lean towards the sharks pulling this off with this mongrel pack they have just think the Reds will be denied ball and confrontation would suit this shark pack it is loaded with internationals.