🔗 Share this article

Transpired the manager could survive losing against lower-league opposition. Survive a decisive European final versus a particularly poor Spurs sides for many years. He withstood home defeats to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, undermining the team's best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to engage. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship campaign, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated at his players for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of one of England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this entire bruising episode seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to regard him as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position as much to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any verifiable talent. How wrong we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, just as he bested the hapless Dan Ashworth earlier, he has demonstrated to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which United’s mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

The Strategic Clash Over Formation & Philosophy

For example, this was the director , after having been part of the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim in the first place, played a key role in trying to persuade him to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when issued by a man with the unimpeachable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of international appearances and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, without any penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely in public, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals in football – individuals such as him – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, probably we would perceive would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite the same as being ready to comprehend it.

An Supreme Authority In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the true genius behind the modern United throne. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to adopt analytics and metrics. Per reports, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he announced that United’s style of play “shall be decided in this room”.

After all, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate football matters, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy are superior: more insightful, sagacious, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else would you 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 Football Hierarchy: Executives Over Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier of the game. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously possible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and drive to go into a club and see their vision through to completion. But how many companies have such individuals established? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to decide the tactics by the directors and hire a coach who will adapt their methods to suit. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not really responsible for the food, yet finally accountable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role has become less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the public face for a club they can do little to influence. Enzo Maresca takes a squad of literal children into Europe and secures domestic cups, and essentially is dismissed for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who appointed him live to blunder another day.

A Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism at work: the elevation of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without justification. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then fire him for playing too much that system. Hire the process guy and then bin them for taking excessive time. And above all show gratitude; for your modest season ticket price rises, for the latest player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.