A recent piece in the Daily Mail delighted in examples of what it termed "AVBinglish" – that is, the display of linguistic acrobatics during TV interviews for which André Villas-Boas has now become famous. Some of Villas-Boas's statements are, of course, hilarious and sometimes downright weird. For instance, his claim that football is "a massive sport in which we are inserted" sounds odd in any language, as does his assertion that "it can go into the equation that the third place becomes nearer to us".

Also implicit in the article is the idea that Villas-Boas has succumbed to the disease that supposedly afflicts many a modern football manager – over-elaborate and meaningless use of technical footballing jargon. Reference was made to the former Burnley chief executive Paul Fletcher's recent autobiography, where it was revealed that he had rejected Villas-Boas's application for the managerial vacancy that arose following Owen Coyle's departure from the club. Justifying his decision, Fletcher quoted Tommy Docherty: "He used to say, he never said anything to his players his milkman wouldn't understand. I don't think any milkman would fathom the meaning of André's presentation."

Being published just after Villas-Boas's premature departure from Chelsea, Fletcher's revelation fitted nicely with the new narrative being written by some of his detractors, painting him as a man of style over substance, a man-child out of his depth desperately trying to sound like a grown-up. However, this sits oddly with the perception of Villas-Boas in his home country, which is by and large that of a very bright manager who expresses himself in an eloquent and coherent manner. Indeed, his successor at Porto, Vítor Pereira, even bemoaned his own difficulty in dealing with the media, acknowledging that he was not as strong a communicator as Villas-Boas.

In general, Villas-Boas's misuse of the English language has less to do with a desire to impress his audience with convoluted David Brent-style managerial-speak, than a well-meaning attempt to fully engage with the media. As far as foreign football managers go, Villas-Boas's English is exemplary – it certainly fares better than that of Jacques Santini, Claudio Ranieri or Fabio Capello.

Villas-Boas's problem is that in many cases, these well-meaning attempts leave him open to ridicule whenever (quite often) he literally translates from Portuguese into English, but fails to translate culturally what he really means to say. When Villas-Boas said that Jermain Defoe can "smell" crosses, he is literally translating a commonly-used Portuguese idiom. Hulk, Nuno Gomes and Oscar Cardozo are all strikers who have been praised in the Portuguese media for having an ability to "smell" goals, without this being taken to be a reference to their olfactory abilities.

Likewise, his praise of Michael Dawson for having great "human qualities" is not a reflection on the Tottenham captain's biological classification. In Portuguese, as in most Romance languages, references to a person's "humanity" are a perfectly acceptable form of praise, relating to a person's qualities in terms of people skills, approachability and empathy.

Villas-Boas is by no means the first foreign manager to mistranslate or to export foreign idioms into English football. Gianluca Vialli once bizarrely asserted that teams "must be strong in March, when the fish are down" – fiche is Italian for gambling chips. Villas-Boas's compatriot and mentor José Mourinho came up with a few zingers himself. Possibly the most famous of these was his "parking the bus in front of the goal" comment, made in the aftermath of a dour draw against Tottenham in the 2004-05 season. The expression elicited much amusement from the British media, to such an extent that the term has now become part of the global football lexicon.

However, Mourinho did preface his "park the bus" comment with an acknowledgement that this was a Portuguese expression. Herein lies a main difference between Villas-Boas and Mourinho: Villas-Boas probably has a wider grasp of English vocabulary but Mourinho has a stronger mastery of the English language in its cultural context, meaning that he was better able to use the media to his advantage. More importantly, Mourinho seems acutely aware at all times of the importance of projecting an image of himself that is tailored to his particular audience. His press conferences may seem hectic, off-the-cuff events, but the suspicion is that every word is measured and thought through.

This is something that can be seen throughout Mourinho's career. In his first press conference on joining Internazionale, after proclaiming that he had learned Italian in a mere three weeks, he went on to wow his audience by displaying an impressive grasp of the Italian language, even going so far as to use Milanese slang. Later on, after joining Real Madrid, Mourinho gave an interview to the Spanish newspaper El País, in which he was asked to comment on his influences; the journalist noted that Mourinho related his life as if reading his CV from a teleprompter. The image is that of a man who strives to always be in control of the image he projects to the outside world.

Of course, the use of language in its correct cultural context only takes you so far. Language only really becomes an issue for managers if they are not successful. Juande Ramos's lack of proficiency in English was not flagged as an issue when he was leading Tottenham to a League Cup success. However, when his side embarked on an eight-match winless streak in the subsequent season, his communication skills were pointed out as one of the reasons for the team's failure. Luiz Felipe Scolari often gave long and protracted press conferences in his approximate English during his time at Chelsea, making a number of gaffes. While his early references to "Chelsea-a" and the many "mens" on his management team caused nothing more than a titter at the time, once Chelsea's performance started slipping they were seen as evidence of his incompetence and inability to adapt to a new cultural and footballing environment.

The Villas-Boas experience is quite telling in this respect. Had Paul Fletcher's autobiography been released one year earlier, when Villas-Boas was being feted as one of the most accomplished young managers in Europe, the decision not to appoint him might have looked foolish. Luckily for Fletcher, his book was released at a time when Villas-Boas's stock was at a low. Nevertheless, it is interesting to consider that a club such as Porto readily appointed Villas-Boas while Burnley discarded him as too cerebral. Fletcher's explanation that Villas-Boas's language and concepts were too complex to be understood by the club's players appears to be based on an assumption that football is a simple game for simple people. It's not just that his ideas were deemed overelaborate, it's also that the players were not considered to have the faculties to understand these ideas.

From this perspective, Burnley's dismissive attitude towards Villas-Boas's language may be more reflective of a clash in footballing culture. And this culture clash is not necessarily one that opposes the British to their continental counterparts. The same attitude can be seen with regard to Brendan Rodgers, a manager who only last season had been praised for his progressive views on football, but whose insistence on sticking to a particular tactical philosophy in post-match interviews appears to be wearing thin with some fans.

That football managers are criticised for their team's bad performances on the pitch is natural, but the ease with which critics will prey on the use of novel language by managers when they are struggling perhaps reflects a deep-seated mistrust towards new approaches in football, or more simply towards managers who are willing to express themselves beyond the safe haven of the traditional football stock phrases used by managers, players and pundits.

It's not just the possibility of the message being lost in translation with which managers such as Villas-Boas must contend, it's also the danger of opening the door to mockery when that message or the manner in which it is delivered does not conform to what the prevailing football culture expects from its managers.