🔗 Share this article

Itranspired he endured losing against Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial European final versus one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, undermining some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, calling his team the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on the executive and appears to have missed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who often railed at his players for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of one of the Premier League’s most intimidating football executives.

In truth, this entire bruising episode appears to portray the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his brief stint in a similar role at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated as one of the sport’s true generals: a strategic mind that the club's mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

The Tactical Conflict Regarding System & Ideology

For example, this was Jason Wilcox who having been part of the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, played a key role in trying to persuade him to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these pleas faced pushback. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a title-winning side decades past.

Maybe eventually he may be persuaded to outline his reasoning publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, with no compensation reduction clause activated. The director seldom speaks publicly, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals in football – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate on a plane beyond our own 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 quite equivalent to being ready to receive.

The Ultimate Authority Behind Command

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the real power behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, after all, merely executing the commands of his superior the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to adopt analytics and metrics. Per reports, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he declared that United’s style of play “shall be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate football matters, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Above all he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, strategically brilliant, simply superior. Whom else could one trust to oversee an enlightened programme of austerity, the building of a modern arena that appears a lot like an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. For decades, clubs foolishly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, scouts – players themselves. Maybe previously possible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with ideas and energy to go into a club and see their vision through to completion. But how many businesses have such individuals established? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to invest the real power where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to determine the strategy in the boardroom and appoint someone who can tailor their methods to suit. If coaches were once chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not really creating the product, but still finally accountable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly not about defining the vision and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of literal children into Europe and wins two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy sees his standing damaged while those individuals who hired him live to blunder another day.

A Neoliberal Football: Accountability Only for the Few

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the rise of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain sacrosanct, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then fire him for playing too much that system. Bring in the project manager and later discard them for requiring too long. And most importantly show gratitude; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the adults – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.