Obviously the captains were all sub-standard and poorly trained otherwise why would they crash.
I do not have the report to hand but I do know that it covered many years of operations and included many different airlines and that it was a statistical fact that on 75% of occasions the Captain was flying the aircraft. (I recall now that the analysis referred to non precision approaches only) I think it is too simplistic to say that they were all "sub-standard and poorly trained", indeed I believe in many cases they were competent and experienced operators. However allowing the FO (who is almost certainly less experienced) to fly the approach frees up the Captain to monitor the approach and is probably a safer option. Surely this is a better use of the "Resources" on the flight deck?
As I said before it's also a question of what you are used to. If you have never flown the monitored approach before it seems a bit bizarre but once you have I think you will see the benefits.