🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear he endured a loss to lower-league opposition. He weathered losing a crucial continental showpiece against one of the worst Spurs sides in living memory. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, laying waste to the team's best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach came at the executive and seems to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers will notice the irony here: a coach who frequently berated his squad for losing one-on-one duels succumbing when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of a the Premier League’s most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this whole bruising episode seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role with the Saints, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position as much to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any verifiable talent. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that United’s mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Clash Over Formation and Ideology

To illustrate, this was the director , after being involved in the hierarchy that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in trying to persuade him to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these pleas were resisted. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, holder of international appearances and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time he might agree to explain his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked why Amorim is walking away with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause activated. The director speaks rarely in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, probably all we would hear would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not equivalent to being ready to receive.

The Supreme Power Behind the Throne

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his ultimate superior the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his desire for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for United to embrace data science and metrics. Per reports, during a leadership summit early in his investment, he declared that United’s style of play “shall be determined by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and yachting. Above all he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else could one trust to manage a strategic plan of austerity, the construction of a new stadium that appears similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of a new striker?

The Modern Football Order: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and drive to go into a club and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many companies have such individuals set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the tactics in the boardroom and hire someone who will adapt their methods accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like Deliveroo drivers: not creating the product, but still finally accountable should it be delivered cold or fails to meet standards.

In the meantime, their job has become less about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist of the operation, the public face of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of literal children into Europe and wins domestic cups, and effectively is dismissed for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

A Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain sacrosanct, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss him for using excessively that system. Hire the process guy and later bin them for taking excessive time. And most importantly show gratitude; for your modest season ticket price rises, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.