[meandbrenarebaggies]

Exactly my point. 100 years ago, in 1917, we had 22 players running around the
pitch playing FOOTBALL. Their attitude was not win at all cost but to use their own
physical and mental attributes in a fair competition to see how they measured
against a likeminded team. Their individual skills were prized but teamwork and
good sportsmanship even more so. They would have considered a “manager” a
necessary (?) hanger-on who dealt with league letters and white wash for marking
the pitch. This “manager” has, over the years, introduced a philosophy of using
underhand methods to win…deliberate time wasting by kicking the ball away; encouragement of leg-breaking tackles; marking talented opponents out of the
game; surrounding refs to get favourable decisions; tactical use of substitutes; pulling
players shirts; diving in the box…the negative impact of “managers” is endless.
To cap it all, they take the natural talent of potentially great players and obliterate
it by coaching it all out of them making the game we watch a mechanical set-piece
with all flair extinguished.

I reiterate; Who the “manager” is…is totally irrelevant; they are all bad for the game.