🔗 Share this article

Itranspired the manager could survive defeat by Grimsby. Survive losing a crucial continental showpiece against one of the worst Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive home defeats against West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, laying waste to some of the club’s best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was a single opponent against whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to dance. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, similar to numerous Premiership defender during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach came at Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the irony here: a manager who frequently berated at his players for losing individual battles succumbing in the face of the white heat and formidable presence of a England's top division's most feared sporting directors.

And frankly, this entire bruising episode seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. It may have been tempting, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to regard Jason Wilcox as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position largely to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that the club's competitors are now justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Conflict Regarding Formation & Ideology

To illustrate, this was the director who having been part of the hierarchy that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach in the first place, played a key role in attempting to convince him to abandon his beloved formation. Naturally, these entreaties were resisted. However, these judgements hold greater authority when issued by a man with the impeccable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, holder of international appearances and a role in a championship team from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his reasoning publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, without any penalty clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as him – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, most likely we would perceive would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not equivalent to being ready to comprehend it.

The Supreme Authority In the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his preference for a back four. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace data science and analytics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style of play “shall be determined by this group”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is an expert in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, simply superior. Who else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that appears similar to an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Above Managers

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing at the elite levels football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to subordinate staff like managers, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and drive to go into an organization and implement their plan supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of large-scale layoffs have they managed? Better by far to place the real power where it belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. Better by far to decide the tactics by the directors and appoint a coach who will adapt their offering accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the product, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Accountability for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this is simply corporate governance in action: the rise of a gilded elite who can never be wrong, whose decisions are always untouchable, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for playing too much that system. Hire the process guy and then discard them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for your modest season ticket price rises, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the adults – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.