IF Stuart Pearce had two games to save his job before Manchester City's defeat by Chelsea last night, logic ought to tell you that he now has just the one: an awkward-looking trip to Middlesbrough on Saturday.

In truth, though, it has never been quite as straightforward as that. While the pressure from boardroom level is more real than Pearce appears to recognise, and there has been no public declaration of support for him during a testing period, City's chairman, John Wardle, is not looking for an excuse to change manager.

Wardle would be far happier if Pearce were to guide City out of their present slump and win back the club's supporters in doing so - and, even if his position remains highly unstable, there was the odd sign during their fifth consecutive Barclays Premiership defeat on Wednesday that he could do that. It was a far more passionate and yet disciplined performance, as they lived with the champions for long periods, but not until the fourth minute of stoppage time did they force Petr Cech into a save - and even that, a tame Georgios Samaras shot, could hardly be said to have stretched the Chelsea goalkeeper.

In many ways, it was a display that summed up City under Pearce: well organised and full of endeavour, yet devoid of any cutting edge in attack. If he is to lose his job, whether soon or at the end of the season, it will be because his strikers have failed to deliver - or, to put a different slant on it, because he has failed to deliver strikers who can deliver goals. Samaras, Bernardo Corradi, Darius Vassell and Paul Dickov all have qualities, but there is not a natural goalscorer among them and that is what is hurting a City team that would be comfortably mid-table if only they could score goals.

Does failing to sign the right striker make Pearce a bad manager? No. But it has made watching City a tedious experience at times this season. That is a big part of the problem. Their supporters are accustomed to thrills and spills. Mid-table mediocrity - and they do still seem equipped for that, even if they are looking over their shoulders at Charlton Athletic in 18th place - is evidently not what it is cracked up to be.

Against Chelsea, though, City did not look like a team that has stopped playing for its manager. Nor did the crowd, much of it hostile to Pearce in recent weeks, seem to have lost faith altogether. It is to be hoped that the board too retain some support for Pearce. After all, would sacking him now be the act of a strong board or a weak one? There are enough lessons in City's chequered history to tell them that changing manager at the first time of trouble is often no solution at all.