I'm always curious when people make an assessment of the assistant manager. What do you have to go on? Isn't the assistant ultimately carrying out the will of the manager albeit the manager may listen to his ideas and take them on board occasionally.
I've saw no end of occasions when an assistant manager has taken control of the first team following the managers departure and totally changed the style of play which suggests he wasn't totally on board with his predecessors ideas.
Like I say, not having a go or disagreeing with your assessment but genuinely curious as to how who formed that opinion.
Fair comments and your right to question what is my take on it and offer yours. You make some good points about how a no 2 changes things up when they take a caretaker role but then that's in a reactive situation to a manager likely being sacked but your right they don't always share the same idea which is what you want. A trusted no 2 challenging your ideas constantly and offering his own ideas. Not one that going yes boss good idea boss.
For over 300 games and 10 years they have known and worked together. At 5 clubs now they have worked together daily and importantly have that connection in matches bouncing ideas off each other. A trusted opinion and not necessarily the same opinion but that's what makes a duo.
Rarely do you see Adi Vivesh in MR ear like we did with Steve Taylor. To me that connection isn't there and suggests Vivesh is here supporting MR going along with MR thoughts or his own tactical thoughts of academy football which as many are now realising is still strides away from L2 football.
Of course it's my assumption from how I look on opposite the dugout at home games and little change I see on the pitch. I believe MR is missing his right hand man to a degree, it's not the absolute issue but a factor in a big equation.
Hope that gives a better insight to how I see it.
