"When the general comes to visit before the battle" Topic

Was reading an old magazine I had on Rommel from about 30 years ago, when something struck me. The article was telling how he liked to visit the troops to get a gauge on their morale. Many generals throughout time have done this of course. There's the famous photo of Ike visiting the 101 prior to DDay. Napoleon was famous for this. I have also read some funny (in a macabre sort of way) about Frederick the Great doing the same.
Anyway, this got me to wondering just how useful this really was. If the Army then, was anything like my Army experiences in the late 1980s, I have my doubts. When the general comes to visit, I suspect the unit leaders would hide the troublemakers and less useful types far from the general's prying eyes. I am quite sure the general only got to visit with the best soldiers – regardless of what the orders were.
Wouldn't this give them a somewhat misleading opinion of the true morale of the "regular Joes?'
Just wondering

That's why Henry V goes around the camp in disguise, the night before Agincourt – to sound out the lads anonymously. In Shakey's version, anyway.

It misinforms the general about their equipment and the state of their training too.

That's why, if you really want to know something, you don't schedule an inspection: you just drop in. And you speak to soldiers when their superiors aren't listening. US generals in the late 1980's--I was there too--tended not to do that sort of thing. I think they were afraid of what they might learn.

The announced visit does get everything spruced up, though. And Montgomery used those huge assemblies to make sure every soldier in 8th Army understood what was expected of him at Alamein and why. Different tools have different uses, and a good professional has a well-stocked tool chest.

It worked great for Dan Morgan!

I'm always intrigued by the wargame bit where having an attached general raises morale, but the general doesn't have to test. Even more so by the notion that the unit somehow functions better--moves faster, fights harder--because The General is with them. Some general somewhere, maybe. But usually you're much better off with the general running the division and letting the battalion and company commanders run the battalions and companies.

Well, this visit by the General had an effect but not sure what kind of effect.

link

I have played in games where the General or Mounted Officer was so bad that attaching him was a negative to your rating.

Robert, I assumed that the attached general represents focus, clarity of objective, and officers trying to impress. PBI, usually not so much.

A visible leader is important for a variety of reasons. At the same time, think of this, if a general never shows up before action, what do soldiers think?

I think it has to do with the period as well, for Medieval Europeans and some ancients, to lead meant just that.