🔗 Share this article

Iturns out Ruben Amorim was able to withstand losing against lower-league opposition. Survive losing a crucial continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, undermining some of the club’s most promising academy products, the 32% win rate, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to engage. You come at Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, similar to numerous Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship campaign, the coach took on the executive and appears to have failed. The most casual observer will notice the irony here: a manager who often railed at his players for losing one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of a the Premier League’s most intimidating sporting directors.

In truth, this entire painful saga appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his brief stint in a similar role at Southampton, to view him as merely a functionary within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due as much to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has proved himself to be among the sport’s true generals: a tactical intellect of which United’s competitors will now be rightly wary.

The Strategic Clash Over System and Ideology

For example, this was Jason Wilcox who being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, played a key role in attempting to convince him to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties were resisted. However, these judgements carry more weight when delivered by a man of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his reasoning to the rest of us. Maybe one day he might be asked why Amorim is departing with full compensation, without any penalty clause in place. The director seldom speaks publicly, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as him – simply operate on a plane exceeding our prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, most likely all we would hear would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not equivalent to being prepared to receive.

An Ultimate Power Behind the Throne

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the modern United throne. The director is, after all, merely executing the commands of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his desire for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for the club to adopt data science and metrics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach to football “will be decided by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, leveraging his background in industry and yachting. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are superior: more insightful, sagacious, strategically brilliant, fundamentally better. Who else would you trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a new stadium that looks a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, clubs foolishly delegated major sporting choices to subordinate staff such as coaches, scouts – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to join an organization and implement their plan supported to fruition. But how many companies have such individuals established? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy by the directors and appoint someone who will adapt their methods to suit. If managers were once chefs, they have become more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the food, yet ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly less about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the visible figurehead for a club they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of literal children into Europe and wins domestic cups, and essentially gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined while those individuals who hired him live to blunder another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Accountability for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply neoliberalism in action: the rise of a privileged elite who are infallible, whose decisions remain sacrosanct, whose mistakes can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss them for using too much 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and then discard him for requiring too long. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.