(Jonathan Howcroft is an Englishman residing in Melbourne with a keen interest in Manchester United - and journalism.)

I'm sorry, have I missed the memo? Goals are now apparently a bad thing for soccer - or so said my BPL colleague Francis Leach this week. They are the currency used by evil ‘haves' to subjugate the envious and helpless ‘have nots'.

Do me a favour.

Firstly a quick recap of the weekend's three 6-0 scorelines which anchored these thoughts. One thrashing was administered by newly promoted Newcastle against a side playing in this season's Europa League: ‘haves' 0 - ‘have nots' 6. Arsenal's came against a Blackpool side competing for the dishonour of being the weakest of the 44 sides ever to gain promotion to the Premier League - a side further handicapped by being reduced to 10 men after 32 minutes. Finally, Chelsea's six came against a Wigan side beaten 4-0 by that same comedy Blackpool outfit the week before and boasting the previous season's worst goal difference.

The insinuation that wealth is the primary reason for these comprehensive results is a convenient but fundamentally flawed assessment. With the exception of Blackpool, which has commendably attempted to impose a restrictive wage limit, all other sides in the league have either wealthy owners who have invested heavily in the team (Chelsea, Man Utd, Spurs, Man City, Liverpool, Villa, Birmingham, Fulham, Sunderland, Stoke, Wigan, West Ham, Blackburn and Newcastle) or enough history to have been able to generate sufficient income over time to compete or be in a position to attract outside investment (Arsenal, Everton, Bolton, Wolves and West Brom).

Of the 20 Premier League clubs, only Blackpool, Fulham and Wigan have spent less than 50 years throughout their history in the top division. Surely enough to time to get their houses in order.

The second premise, that money has diluted the EPL into a boring four-way battle (I assume the four are Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal and Man City - not Spurs, who finished fourth last year, or Liverpool, who were second the year before that) is testament to how badly the chasing pack has invested their new wealth than the leaders buying continual success.

Chelsea's starting XI for example contains only Ivanovic and Anelka signed after August 2007 while Manchester United's first XI contains only Berbatov and Valencia signed since that date.

The issue is not of wealth; it is how wisely that money is spent.

Wigan, Blackpool and West Brom have all been smashed this year because, relative to the competition, they are not very good and they have played sides likely to be competing for the title in red-hot form. Don't forget Wigan actually beat Chelsea 3-1 last season, so drawing conclusions from one weekend can be a short-sighted enterprise.

Back in 1991-92 when the EPL was just the plain old First Division of the Football League, players were unskilled, grounds were unfilled and goals were as hard to come by as rocking-horse shit. Now the league is home to the best international players, playing the fastest, most competitive football in the world. Let's just sit back and enjoy it, eh?