In writing what follows, I could well face the same chastisement as did one Sybil Fawlty some 30 years previous in being accused of possessing a degree in stating the bleedin' obvious.

But anyway, for those interested, just over 15% or almost 1/6th of the Swans' 2004/2005 season has already passed us by, and we sit in 10th place on 7 points from 7 games.

If we were to continue accumulating points at this rate, then we would end the season on 46 points and no doubt see us bordering on the dog fight for survival.

If all teams in League 2 were to continue their form of the first 7 games however, we would end up 10th, which sounds much better doesn't it.

There will be no great excitement or concern resulting from our current standing, but maybe 5 goals for and 5 against from these games will cause a little more seat shuffling as people start to look at form guides, build their expectations for the remainder of the season, and look forward to what 2005/2006 may have to offer in the (Insert Sponsor's Name Here) Stadium.

Now if our goal scoring performance continues unabated we could well see just over 30 goals in a season, with around about 12 being scored at the Vetch, with the travelling faithful being served up a whopping 18 away from home.

Aren't statistics fun? Of course this won't happen, everyone's season changes direction many times, performances peak and trough throughout, and it is this unpredictability which makes sport what it is.

With all this in mind, I was a little uncomfortable with Kenny Jackett feeling the need to explain himself, defend himself, or comment in any manner whatsoever to the Evening Post reading public in an open letter last week. I say this not because it is so early in the season but because he should not feel obliged to do so at any stage.

Words such as 'gel' and 'acclimatise' along with phrases such as 'players getting to know each other' were being thrown about websites and mailing lists throughout the close season at will, and with acceptance.

It was going to be his fresh start, with his squad, and it would take time, albeit that any ambition for play-off or automatic promotion places would limit the time he had available to settle the team into an acceptable goal scoring and points gathering rhythm.

Arguments on whether the team have actually played the 'long ball', 'route one' or as hit has now become known, the 'lump it up the middle' style have been very balanced as far as I can tell. As such the current feeling that good ol' Kenny has listened to the fans, the players, the press, and anyone else with a view on his plans, and altered them to satisfy the masses would appear to be slightly belittling to the mans standing and self confidence.

It would seem that a slightly more 'footballing' performance over the Bank Holiday weekend brought his first home win, and with it the plaudits of the fans. Reading yesterday's match reports, some of the best football we have played all season, resulted in a loss. Pretty much the same ratio as any 'previous' style has brought in the early exchanges.

Why don't people just leave this guy get on with his job, forget about unearthing rumblings of dissatisfaction in the playing ranks - that exists in all jobs in whatever industry you wish to mention - and judge him, as has been said many times recently, on a dozen or, preferably, more games.

If he has plans for success and they fail, then the board will no doubt be having talks with him and the fans will respond accordingly I am sure with their feet. Lower gates and behind closed door meetings, are not what this season should be about, but aren't too many of us pre-empting these things.

It is well known that our championship winning side of 1999/2000 took us into the then Division 2 with possibly the lowest number of goals celebrated in a season of success - 51 in 46 games, and 30 conceded. The critical factor in that however is that we won 24 of our games. It might not have been the prettiest of seasons, but if we had built on that success instead of squandering the chance, then the bitter taste of having watched that type of bland football for a season or two might have washed away by now.

Forgive me for returning to the bleedin' obvious for a moment, but teams win matches and promotion if they regularly score more than the opposition. The critical factor in all of this, to me at least, is whether that equation is balanced on your defence having the ability to cope with the pressure and keeping the opposition out in most games, knowing that you are going to struggle to score goals yourself, or on your strike force having the confidence, ability and capability to outscore the opposition, thereby reducing your dependence on there being no defensive blunders in a game.

Either way it's a balance. The ideal answer is not to rely on either but have a well structured team capable of handling both aspects of the game equally well,

A manager's approach to that equation will often determine the style of football that he will demand, and the fans will have to watch.

At the end of a season, success is what will be measured, and even though some 'mid table' seasons will be acceptable if the football is attractive, similar ending seasons of lumping the long ball up route one where only East Stand fans have normal neck posture, can only be suffered for so long.

If the Swans start next year in the new stadium in League 1, then few will look back on the final year at Vetch Field and consider the standard of football too critically. Preferably we may get there with a season of attractive and successful football behind us, and something to hang on to for future years. Whatever the outcome, judge him then, and let's stop having to put signs on the gaffer's door saying 'the manager formerly known as' quite so often. If the English RFU had adopted the same stance with Clive Sir Woodward in his early years, he would never have been around to hold the Webb Ellis trophy aloft last year. They persisted with him, and allowed him to develop a team. They may be English, but surely others can learn something from that.