Now that is definitely more like it. OK, so yep, we still can't keep a clean sheet and, yep, we still ain't clinical enough in front of goal, but boy is it good to be able to mildly criticise a team which has just played well for still not being as good as they so clearly could be.
We are such a different prospect to what we were three months ago, a different team but only three different players. Does this reflect how good Roeder is or how bad Grant was?
Are we doing what we should have been doing all along or has Glenn got a small bag of that magic dust all good managers have which they can sprinkle over a team or a player and bring about a Jekyll and Hyde like transformation?
This is a tricky question, and it's still too early to say to be honest, but three things about this game can give us some clues us to what Stanley's eventual answer might be.
Firstly, one of the new faces in the team since October, is Ched Evans. Now Ched is the real deal, if we are honest, a cut above even Jamie, let alone the Browns and Strihavkas of this world. So Glenn knows his 'onions', so to speak, he just needs to pull a couple out of the bag on permanent deals to ensure our change in fortunes is permanent.
Secondly, Fozzy. Now this particular Stanley is quite happy to put his hand up and say that he's always doubted that Fozz was good enough. But under Glenn, the man is blossoming into the lynchpin of the side, giving him the armband has had the effect Grant no doubt hoped it would have had on Shacks. But didn't.
Thirdly, the team formation. Now there's nothing unusual in City playing 4-3-3 under any City manager from the past 30 years, let alone those three poor souls who have had to pick City teams whilst dealing with the whole 'Huckerby Question'.
But playing 4-3-3 whilst leaving Hucks on the bench? Now that is a brave decision, leaving out your best player in order to strengthen the team. It's always the right decision, but always a tough one for a manger to take.
You need the players to believe in you in order to carry it off. This decision also opens the door on the whole 'What will City look like post-Hucks..?' question.
But all that is for the future, well sometime over the summer Stanley suspects. With regard to the immediate future Stan's cup 'over-flowth' with optimism.
Bury away on a Tuesday leaves a man of Stanley's age with a relatively spring like bounce in his step. This a game Stan is confident we can win at a canter (though of course Stan will no doubt be eating these words on this website sometime Wednesday morning…), we ain't going to play as badly against these opponents again (Oops, two slices of humble pie for Mr Stanley…).
As for Southampton away Stanley really fancies City to do the business, OK, OK, one thing at time, Bury first then worry about whoever in the next round, if we make it that far.
Come what may for the rest of this season, in both league and cup, we are still going to need five or six new players before the end of August. We can afford to begin to have one eye on next season now, so one or two by the end of January is all that is needed for the time being.
Unless, of course, the purse strings are going to be loosened to allow a mini spending spree to trigger a Palace like surge into the play-offs? Now, now, Stan just sit down quietly in front of Ceefax and fantasy about mid-table mediocrity before we get too carried away, one step at a time old partner.
We now have a very nice little run of very winnable home games, which, Stanley confidently predicts, will see City sail serenely into the calm waters of mid?table obscurity well before Easter.
Blast me, we could even make it into the top half of the table, now that really would be a fantasy come true for all those Stanleys out their who spend far too much time sat in front of Ceefax.