On the one hand, yes, we're third in the table, level on points with the second placed team and we've accumulated a healthy number of points for this stage of the season. Maybe, with football being a fairly simple game, we should just be happy with that?
I like to look a little deeper than that though, and when you do look deeper, there are a number of questions that need to be asked, and a worrying lack of answers.
Twice this season Swansea have outplayed Blues. The fact that they only have one point to show for it is an injustice, and the fact that Blues have four points to show for it is fuel for the fire of those who say "it's all about points". In many ways, they're right. However, if Blues continue to be outplayed by the likes of Swansea, Blackpool, Doncaster, Coventry and QPR then, well, their luck will run out, the points will dry up, and that argument will fall away.
Having been at Swansea on that Friday night six weeks or so ago, I had seen first hand what a bloody good footballing team that they are. For 45 minutes they made Blues chase shadows - more so than some of the top Premier League sides have in recent years. Yes, they ran out of steam, made errors and Blues took advantage, but the warning was there.
So, for Round Two, you'd have thought Blues might have been on their guard a little more. They weren't though, and Swansea outplayed them comfortably again. David Murphy was sent off for a second bookable offence in the second half, but Swansea had been the better side until then anyway. The fact that Murphy and others in blue shirts had been booked in the first half was a sign that Blues were frustrated at chasing shadows. That old footballing cliche "the bloke behind" berated Mike Riley for all of them, suggesting that he was cheating and also impying that he had certain sexual preferences. The bloke behind was wrong though - they all deserved bookings, if not for the challenge itself, but because of a cumulation of challenges by the bookee.
What's the difference between the sides then? Blues have the better players. Anyone who argues with that is wrong. It's a fact. Ask a random, neutral manager to pick between each player in their respective positions in the Blues and Swansea sides, and whilst you might not quite get a clean sheet of eleven Blues players, you'd get nine at least, I'm sure.
So, how can Swansea outplay Blues so easily? Their players aren't as good. Having watched the two encounters between the sides, it's quite clear that it comes down to management/coaching.
Swansea play football the way fans like to watch it. They retain possession as much as possible. They hardly ever resort to playing a ball that there is a doubt about. Ball retention is the key. There were a number of free-kicks in this game, for both sides. When Swansea won one, the excellent Leon Britton was there, putting the ball down and knocking it a yard to a team mate. Thus, Swansea retained possession and built again. When Blues won one, both centre halves ambled forward and a full back or Lee Carsley lobbed a ball to around the six yard box. Blues had a 50% chance of winning that ball, and then as the ball dropped, probably a 40% chance of winning the second ball, given that there is always more defenders than attackers. 40% of 50% is 20%. As such, one in five Blues free kicks might lead to Blues retaining possession? That seems about right in my head, having watched Blues. However, approximately 95% of Swansea's free kicks led to them retaining possession.
Yes, that's over-simplifying and getting a bit mathematical, but it's one basic thing that Swansea do far, far better than Blues. Why waste possession?? What can you possibly achieve if you don't have possession? In their build-up play, Swansea move for one another. If they need to pass two yards, they pass two yards. It's basic, simple football. They rarely, if ever, launch a ball forward. When Blues lump a ball forward at Marcus Bent's head, they have a small chance of retaining possession (some of the idiots who cheered him off when he was substituted would probably say "no chance"). When a Swansea centre half knocks the ball five yards forward into midfield to Britton to turn and pick a pass, well, they've retained possession. To score goals, you need possession of the football. To have possession of the football, you need to make sure you keep it. Blues don't do that.
But earlier on we established that Blues have better players than Swansea? Plus Swansea are several places and many points behind Blues, so what's the fuss about? Well, if Roberto Martinez can get a bunch of no-mark British players and a few journeyman Spaniards doing that, why can't Alex McLeish and his coaching staff get Blues' team full of internationals doing it? The reason that Swansea aren't as high up the table is because their players aren't good enough to be any higher. They're playing to their potential now, and are doing bloody well as a result of it. Can we honestly say that Blues are playing to their potential? No chance in hell. Why not? Well, that's a question I can't answer. I virtually guarantee (as much as you can guarantee something hypothetical) that if Blues approached the game in the way that Swansea do, then they'd have more points than they do now.
Swansea's players aren't as good as Blues', and that's why they don't do so well. They'll make mistakes, and mistakes will be punished. Playing that kind of football means that mistakes will happen, especially when your players are playing at a level higher than the majority of them have ever played. Their football though, well, compared to Blues it's streets ahead. "Clueless" is a term thrown around a lot, but at times here, Blues were genuinely clueless. Football's not all about possession and attacking - you have to do the defensive basics well too. Swansea did that, and with Blues' chronic lack of movement, all that was left was a long ball forward to Bent. Swansea players move for one another and always have a pass on.
A week on from Reading out-doing Blues at the basics, another team did the same. Thankfully Swansea's players aren't as good as Reading's and Blues got away with a draw. The fact that Blues are unable to do the basics well though, well, that's a real, real worry. The players are more than good enough, and therefore by process of elimination, questions must be asked of those working with the players, picking the side, working on tactics, etc. I know it's easy to say, but sometimes the most obvious answer is the right one. It's a worry, because we're getting to the stage of the season where the top sides always kick on. Blues look like they could potentially be left behind when they do.
Yes, the points are there now - but will Blues have enough when it comes to the end of the season? Personally, I'm beginning to have my doubts.