Five? Alive?

So, the gap is eight points. Or, perhaps that should be five. If this is a title chase, then it seems inconceivable that we'll win it if we fail to beat Dagenham on the 26th. Win that game and the title race may be on, lose or draw and this good run of form is academic, apart from building up a head of steam in time for the play-offs.

What this means is that the Dagenham game is not likely to be a title decider as such, it's likely to serve to validate whether there is a title race or not. For now, with a play-off place surely all but secure, we must assume that the purpose of our season at the moment is the title, which, in turn, assumes victory over Dagenham. For without victory over Dagenham there is no title race. Ergo, in the context of the title race, we are in fact 5 points behind.

Not being one of the hardy fools to chose to travel north, I started following the game by teletext, then logging onto the BBC text commentary so I could watch the Liverpool Barcelona game in what SKY would describe as a 'simulcast' (the two games were twenty miles and light years apart).

Eventually having gone one up I decided to tune into Radio Oxford. The game was hosted by an unusual commentary duo; one from Radio Merseyside and one from Radio Oxford (not Nick Harris or Jerome Sale, Nathan thingy, I think). It offered an interesting balance, and perhaps one that should be tried more often. Moments after Duffy missed his penalty Nathan thingy was rather hysterical about how Southport had been galvanised and put the Us on the ropes. During his hyperbole, there was quiet assurance from the bloke from Radio Merseyside that, in fact, Oxford were quite safe and just doing what they had to do.

Perhaps this pragmatism has kept this bloke's career back, after all, surely any decent BBC Merseyside sports reporter was at Anfield not Haig Avenue. It did, however, point out that if you're too close to your team, you can only see the bad in them.