BY DAN

It was already going to be tough to get up after Vegas. Then the Broncos put 50 on the Roosters.

Are the Bronx good? Are the Roosters bad? It’s a question that could just as easily be asked of the Raiders and the Warriors. Or the six or seven teams we watched in round one that looked like they’d just been introduced. But small sample sizes are a curse. We have more explanations than data at this point. Beware the hype like it’s thrashing about like a wacky waving inflatable arm flailing tube man.

That applies in both directions. Canberra may not be as good as we thought, or at least as good as they were against the Warriors. There was a whole build up, a single-minded focus leading into that game for an entire off-season that is not possible to replicate into the future. The atmosphere of the day helped narrow that focus. Everyone did their job, no one felt off. You only get so many games like that a year.

But equally the Broncos came up against a profoundly uninspiring Roosters side. It was about as close to the ‘old’ Roosters as the discarded carcass of a bachelor’s handbag. Other sides like the Dogs have made a virtue of playing donut footy but Easts took this to a whole new level when they not only didn’t attack in the middle, they didn’t defend there either. Or they couldn’t. Pat Carrigan and Payne Haas tore them asunder like Thor threw a bolt down the middle of the field. It’s easy to play a bit of footy when there’s no one stopping you.

So it makes their Saturday night encounter all the more interesting. Two sides trying to prove their last outing wasn’t a fluke. Both bringing the baggage to the game. The Broncos will be fully tilted and hyped. The Raiders hope to be too, but they’ve since lost the captain and a star for an outing against a team choc full of them. Balance that against a coldish Saturday night in Canberra and you’ve got a recipe for fun.

At the risk of setting the bar too low, the result of this is less important than what we see on the field. If Canberra are to be something more than nothing in 2025 we’ll need more proof that the gains of Vegas weren’t a mirage but rather a hard rock they can build on (fuck that’s a deep cut just call me Kendrick). To harken back to 2019, you may remember early in that season when the Raiders came up against a buzzsaw of a Melbourne team in round two. A 22-10 scoreline flattered, but also revealed that the improvements we’d seen in the previous week could sustain against good teams. Such an outing is the minimum viable product this week.

The big improvements we saw in Vegas were a more robust and tied-together defence and an adventurous attack. That combined with a middle that was improved by Corey Horsburgh’s presence, and the improved play at hooker, made for good watching.

That game plan is harder to implement against the Broncos. They won’t hold sway in the middle – battling Pat Carrigan and Payne Haas to a draw is almost a win, particularly without Joey Taps. That will make Tom Starling’s job harder. In the past we’ve spoken about how we loves to play downhill, and always looks great behind a dominant pack. It’s unlikely he’ll get that again. Perhaps less advantageous rucks will mean greater reliance on Owen Pattie to create and manipulate (shouts to Walt Frazier). That’s a big ask for someone in their second game.

They also may not be able to be more adventurous in attack without Xavier Savage’s roaming Rapana impression. That was so instrumental in their first game (see the Timoko try), and if you’re going to beat the Broncos I would target their less heralded edges. Savage showed he had added (or been freed to add) a lick or two to his offensive repertoire, predilected on attacking less agile edges with his mixture of ball play and pace. That will be missed – though that may leave space for more involvement from Kaeo Weekes.

So the challenge will be harder but it’s also a greater measure of whether the improvements on round one are sustainable. That’s a welcome challenge this early in the season. Let’s hope the Raiders are up to it.

Sign up to the mailing list and I’ll tell you the four words you need to know to be able to beatbox. Do me a favour and like the page on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, or share this on social media. Don’t hesitate to send us feedback (dan@sportress.org) or comment below if you think we are stupid. Or if we’re not.