Wallabies captain Michael Hooper predicts David Pocock will “kill it” when he makes his long-awaited playing return and he’s also excited about James O’Connor’s X-factor.
Pocock has been sidelined since March with a calf injury and is no certainty to return for the upcoming Bledisloe Cup series against NZ, starting in Perth on Saturday night.
Despite his lengthy absence, the Wallabies appear set to gamble on him for the World Cup and Hooper has no doubt the 31-year-old will be able to shine when he does make it back.
“I’m not sure when it’s going to be but he looks in great shape and I’m sure when he does get back on the field he’ll kill it,” Hooper said of the man once rated the best flanker in the world.
“They’re going to do the right due diligence on (his calf) and get him back on the field as soon as possible but making sure it’s going to be a continual thing.”
Wallabies coach Michael Cheika has combined Pocock and Hooper in the backline in the past and Hooper has no doubt the tactic can work again.
O’Connor made his Wallabies return in the recent 16-10 win over Argentina in Brisbane, making a 10-minute cameo off the bench following a six-year exile from the national side.
But the 29-year-old is expected to be given more game time against the All Blacks at Perth’s Optus Stadium on Saturday night.
“He’s very dynamic,” Hooper said.
“He’s got a good presence about him in the team at the moment. He’s got genuine X-factor and he can cover a lot of positions.”
Hooper was 10 years old when Australia last won the Bledisloe Cup in 2002.
The 27-year-old is desperate to help the Wallabies end that losing run.
“It’s been that case for a few generations of Australian players now and it would be great to have that look different,” Hooper said.
“But there’s a huge task. NZ are a great team and have been the best team in the world for the past 10 years. And they’ve shown they can grind out (wins) as well.”
The All Blacks experimented heavily with their team line-ups in their 20-16 win over Argentina and 16-16 draw with South Africa.
But NZ coach Steve Hansen has promised to roll out his strongest side against the Wallabies.
The Wallabies have just three games remaining before the start of the World Cup, leaving Cheika with little time to bed down his preferred line-up.
Shed
Roar Rookie
Hooper is like Mcrae for the Western Bulldogs. Gets the most disposals per game but how impactful are they...? Yeh he is fit, tackles his heart out and is absolutely relentless in work ethic but is that truly good enough to be the captain of a team aspiring to be the best in the world...? Any Wallaby team is, has and will always be better with Pocock starting at 7 instead of anyone else. Every other team would take note of a Wallaby backrow of LSL, Naisarani and Pocock with Hooper and Valentine breathing fire on the bench!
taylorman
Roar Guru
Ah ok everyone targets Hooper. Ok then.
Markus
Roar Rookie
Got to hate that fake X-factor! It frustrates me hearing it applied to Pocock because he is the complete opposite of an "X-factor" player. Where X-factor is "An unknown or hard-to-define influence; a factor with unknown or unforeseeable consequences", Pocock's skills and influence on a game are consistent, defined, foreseeable and entirely measurable.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Pocock needs match practice to show his fitness. Have him play NRC before the RWC. There will be three rounds for him to show and prove his fitness..
Malotru
Roar Rookie
Yeah, he'll kill it for the first 10 minutes until he gets injured...............
terrykidd
Roar Pro
Unfortunately your ability in this game is measured completely by the impact you have on your opposition. Exactly which is why the ABs, Boks etc target him so much. Sort of nullifys your whole argument.
Loosey
Roar Rookie
Eureka! ‘X-factor!’ The most overused, misguided, over-the-top, superfluous and nebulous word used as a descriptor in sport. Only trumped by ‘genuine X-factor’ which is apparently even better.
taylorman
Roar Guru
For the Wallabies the bar is set high. I would say Hooper at 7 is one of the several reasons the Wallabies are losing more than they are winning these days. If he's not matching or beating his opposites, then that means someone else has to, and there are usually more than half the side in that position against the top 6-7 teams these days. Unfortunately your ability in this game is measured completely by the impact you have on your opposition.
numpty
Roar Rookie
So he does good enough on the field, just doesn't look big enough to be good? He's the same size as George smith, and he was half dreadlock. Maybe that's what Hooper needs, some dreadies and headgear so he looks 'tougher' and 'bigger', then he might become a good player.
terrykidd
Roar Pro
One of the best in the world is not good enough ??? Maybe you have the bar a touch high.
terrykidd
Roar Pro
Taylorman read Nick Bishop's article on effectiveness at the breakdown .... it isn'y just about steals
terrykidd
Roar Pro
Disagree Taylorman, absolutely the opposite in fact.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Yes Ive a lot of respect for Hooper, he's just not big enough. Can't fault his commitment, speed etc.
numpty
Roar Rookie
Fair enough. As I said I wasn't giving my opinion on who I think is the better player, just who has the style of a bench impact player. I agree Pocock is a good starter or finisher. No doubt Pocock is world class and fully fit he wouldn't be out of my 15. But similarly I think Hooper is also a world class player, you don't get nominated for world player of the year and a john eales medal by mistake. The amount of attention the ABs and SA pay him in defense tells me they think the same. Its just that Hooper doesn't play the traditional role of a 7 that you outline. He can and is actually good (not Pocock level) at hitting/disrupting rucks (Arg game last week), its just that coaches have him playing a different role in the team which is setting line speed, making a mountain of tackles and playing a link man. And at this job, he is one of the best. Many people criticise the player (hooper), when all he is trying to do is the job asked of him by his coach.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Yeah for me Hoopers just not good enough to start at the level. Pococks too good not to start. That for me overrides which end the match suits their particular skills though Hooper would imo be an above average sub.
Ulrich
Roar Rookie
No need to be either or. Play one for 50 mins one game, then the next use the other whilst you also bleed another captain. Francois Louw played off the bench and he's definitely more Pocock than Hooper. K. Smith would not be out of place from the bench either though. Depends on opposition and game dynamics.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Ok that’s fine. Just don’t agree. Hoooper has started every test and so far I don’t see him doing the things you say he would or is doing. Folks here are insisting he’s dropped and have been for a while. His captaincy is also questionable. Pocock has never been considered ‘droppale’ that I know of. Hoopers been generally ineffective at the breakdown for sometime, years in fact regardless of whether Pocock is playing or not.And that’s the primary role of the 7 in a starting role. His defence is ok but he does get swatted aside now and then. Pocock is world class in just about every respect as a loose forward and it would be criminal to have a fully fit Pocock on the bench for more than half a test, particularly for the Wallabies as they are now. He would suit both starting and sub, simply because he’s a great player, but why someone would be on before him I don’t know. I couldn’t name many and Hooper would certainly not be one of them. Hoopers not in his class and for me is sub material at top test level only, but I think he’d be a very good one. Early Savea was similar. Fast, full of carrying and highly mobile, but he’s moved on to prove he’s more than capable of starting at either 7 or 8 now, his breakdown work right up there.
numpty
Roar Rookie
Tman once again you argue in support of my point - "It would take up to or more than a half a match for Hoopers fitness proves valuable." Second, you do nothing but talk about how good Pocock's 'impact' is. Sure sounds like someone I'd like coming off the bench, to 'make an impact', or as Cheika calls them, 'finishers'. I'm not arguing who is the better player or even who I think should start or otherwise for the WBs, merely which players style suits being an impact player off the bench better. For mine, its Pocock's ability to change the game via his pilfers over Hoopers work rate in defense.
U
Roar Rookie
Just get through without getting injured please David. We need a 7 that doesn’t hang out on the wing when the going gets tough
taylorman
Roar Guru
Why? Because fitness is negligible at the start of a match. They’re all fit then. It would take up to or more than a half a match for Hoopers fitness proves valuable. It’s impact that’s needed at the start and Pocock has that in spades. Hooper coming on at 50 to 60, after Pococks mauled and bashed away at them would have him around the field way quicker than the tiring bodies not replaced from starting. His speed and motor would be much more noticeable at that point and tackling the bigger boys after they’ve run for sixty would have far more impact than the first ten. For me probably the perfect sub.