The manager identifying what was going wrong and telling the players how to remedy the situation and tactical / personel changes, rather than rants and "once more unto the breach".
I rest my case your honour.
Man management is an attribute that would be welcome in being a head coach and im sure being a good motivator also helps but it is the IMPORTANCE we place on it in England that is the problem. As seen in this thread, people all feel Clarke will be fine with tactics, analysing our players, analysing opposition and working out what our problems are in matches, but worry that he wont be able to motivate the players and also worry about half time team talks. Apart from the fact it seems impossible to actually know which bits he will be good at and which he wont be good at, I do think this highlights one of the reasons why England are falling behind the rest of the world despite our enthusiasm for the game and our large population.
Standaman made a good point about half time being more about players regrouping. Maybe there was a good talk in the dressing room, but it is an English myth, going back to our times on the battle field and Churchill, that making a good speech and getting everyone fired up is a bigger deal than all of the background preparation and intelligence. For me, in rating a managers attributes, being able to give a good half time team talk is some way down the list for me. Id rather the manager be able to identify what needs to be changed as londonbaggiemike says. Man management may come further up the list but what is man management in the end? Being a good psychologist? Fabio Capello never got on with his players in his career yet he has won everything. It is a good thing to have but again, if place it below analytical skills and football intelligence.
This may sound rude, and apologies if it does, but i think another reason we cling to these things, the press included, is because they are easier concepts for us to understand. We can all identify with Alex Ferguson giving the hair dryer treatment or Harry Redknapp being able to motivate players as it isnt a very deep thinkers subject. Tactical nuances and analysing a performance however are much more complicated however and are harder to make an argument about as none of us know that much about it. We therefore sometimes are drawn towards what is simpler to understand.
It could be worth reading up on the philosophies of the likes of Marcello Bielsa, the Bilbao manager everyone has been waxing lyrical about for the last few months, or Benitez or Wenger. These managers (Bielsa excluded so far) have all done more than any English manager, managing today. You have to question why surely? Why in the modern age are there no English managers? Is it because they have been very slow to adapt to how football managers/coaches should work? Morurinho is somebody people often point to as being the master of mind games, man management etc and yes, he can be good at these things, but do people ignore the fact he surrounded himself with analytical masters like Villa Boas and brought through coaches like Brendon Rogers who again is a football deep thinker? Eventually, I think English coaches will evolve, but I think we as fans and in the media need to think deeper as well and look away from the obvious.