When an author gives his own book a 5-star review, you know you're in trouble.
I loved Slade and The Sweet - they began my musical education. Should a biography of the band or individual members be written? Of course. Sadly, such is the fickle nature of fame, a major publisher would probably pass. So, we're left with a vanity or self-published work. Nothing wrong with that - but why ruin it by not bothering to correct the manuscript?
'Harefield' or 'Harefiled'? You'll get both on the same page. Is Pat Benatar's surname 'Benetar' or 'Benatar'? Both versions are within one paragraph. Why, every time the band Mud is mentioned, is the entire name capitalised? It's BASS guitar, not 'base'; Steve wore his best suit not 'suite', Brian would lose it all, not 'loose' it all and I'm sure Brian changed his name by deed poll, not 'pole'!
Why do I know the author wrote his own review? Because it contains similar mistakes to ones found in his book - "Lacks a bit in the BEGGINING on Brian Connolly's childhood" [Ouch!]
"He tells Brian and all the bands story..." [No, the `band's' story. Mr. Manly has a major dislike for the apostrophe].
"he did his best to carry on and sing while very un well." [No, 'unwell', just as, in the book, you should have walked downstairs to see your hero, not 'down stairs'; whatever not 'what ever'].
'Spellcheck' would have picked up most of these. If you're going to self-publish, you'd hope you'd make a supreme effort to proof and copy-edit more meticulously than most.
I really wanted to like this book and applaud Mr. Manly for doing it but my enjoyment was spoiled by silly errors which really could and should have been picked up.