About the suggestion some goals are winners/in more important games/at more important times in games - I am perplexed as to why this is not a reasonable point to make? If two players score 1 goal each in a season and 1 is the 7th in an 8...0 win whereas the other is the only goal of the game in a close match, surely there's no argument that one is more important? If we'd beaten TNS and Cisse had scored 25 goals, but then none for the rest of the season, would he be worth keeping? Goals aren't the full story - its about what they add to and offer to the team. Plenty of players can score lots of goals but aren't good players. We could buy Mark Robbins or Mick Quinn.