Mmm, lots of sensible commentary.
My own insensible view is that this could be a problem we've had for a long time; namely, a problem with finding the net as often as our dominance would suggest. An inability to score goals was Butcher's calamity, Stubbs didn't really fix it (hence his failure to navigate playoff preliminaries), and now Neil Lennon has a team that can run games but not hit the net anywhere near the number of times it should be.
We've changed manager, we've changed attitude, we've changed squad... But the issue seems to persist.
It could be that we tend to focus on the issue when things don't go quite right, and we worry about what's going on, so perhaps a more rounded view is appropriate. None of us complained when Kamberi and McClaren were both fit near the end of last year, because we were scoring plenty of goals and it was our ability to keep them out that was a bigger pain. In our first season back, it looks like my earlier musing was quite wrong; only the ugly sisters scored more than we did in the league, and there's a solid gap between us and the next team. Similarly this year, we're in a spot where only 'Rangers' have scored more than us in the league (which will likely change as Celtic develop) and we're currently at an average of two per match.
The league average is 1.2 per game. We're well ahead. Last year, it was 1.6 goals per game. Okay, the season is early, but this is an improvement.
As such, despite the frustration of failing to win on Tuesday night despite fucking dominating, the evidence suggests that we're not 'woefully short up front'.
And if we expect some injury rehabilitation to increase the number of times we hit the onion bag, then I think we're going to be okay.
