This will be a critical study on the process of downsizing of the role of grammar at EFL teaching worldwide, emerging as a dominant trend being endorsed by the leading doctrines in the area, such as TESOL, for example, who appear to be acting within their own, self-proclaimed, and self-assured club, and beyond intelligibility with other dovetailing and overlapping aspects that acquisition of either langue is governed by intrinsically. They seem to be operating on the basis of the newly formulated sets of research, appearing as having been in the matter of fact commissioned by themselves, to prove the truths they postulate as the actually viable, which further conduces an obvious secession from the merit of science, and acts in detachment from the vernacular settings of the language that is, and must only be regulated by the neuro-biological substance of a human, that entails grammar onto the foreground as the exclusive agency to navigate the teaching process, so that it was productive, beneficial, and to avail any progress at any level of the targetted command. Once devoided this paragon value reference that sets the right orientation fix solid, no longer is the language by its virtue capable to hold and retain its prime function, which above all, is always communication. The TESOL lobby however, would feel like to skip this not much popular part of the learning process, postulating for alarmingly dodgy alternatives across their so-called academic discourse, such as secondary, or tertiary signifficance of grammar that would be reduced to the bare minimum, in favour of so-called ''communication'', which however, given no grammar is there, may mean something drastically different to them from what it means for example to me, or to millions of other, traditionally oriented linguists across the globe, who can appreciate for the need of the form-focused acquisition in students, and thus understand that this part must remain the pre-requisite and foundation to any further endevours of the student. Therefore, it is inevitable to scaffold up the starting ground to be able to carry on towards the goal, hence musn't be reduced as per conforming with the changing trends or fashion that stultifies representations of the truly acknowledged and supported facts , just to the urge of thus appearing more cozy to not fully transparent TESOL scholars. Teaching grammar however by its substance, may not be otherwise than boring, ardous, or dull, and not is that what customers seek when enrolling at a course. Especially, having heard from miscellaneous sources that grammar was an anachronic relic of the past, and thus would indentify any ''traditional' or instructional model of teaching as inneffective, backwatereded, and counterproductive. This can only be corroborated with what they can find through the latest academic articles, who openly challenge the notion of grammar, hailing it almost as the core of all evil. They wouldn't knoiw though that the research they're reading was commissioned by the TESOL club to dupe them and believe in unrealistic by tossing such a puffpiece to them, which is bogus and a wishing-well nonsense. How come they would do, given all that they pursue nowadays, yet supported by such a tenor across the academic debate, is nothing but fun, and whoever offers them anything else but fun and a goodtime while at teaching, will likely hit on the grass straight away. And this is the effect of what it's like when the truth gets overridden by money, which in the end of the day is soley there behind this misrepresentation, its entrenchement, and mendacity that follows. If we don't step back to the source, which may only be neurology, and the compel of grammar, we will only be defying the truth in consquence. To debunk an academic corruption, and to reassure the learners' awarness of the original standards though, bringing about the facts and evidence this matter is necessary. Hence, this dissertation is necessary:)