🔗 Share this article

Iturns out the manager could survive losing against lower-league opposition. He weathered an important European final against one of the worst Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, laying waste to the team's most promising homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, calling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was a single opponent with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to engage. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership defender in Blackburn’s championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and seems to have failed. 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 crumbling in the face of the white heat and animal charisma of a England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

In truth, this entire painful saga seems to paint the director in a different perspective. It may have been tempting, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view him as merely a functionary within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with his former boss Omar Berrada as any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated manager, just as he bested the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has proved himself as one of football's true generals: a strategic mind of which the club's competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Clash Over System & Ideology

To illustrate, it was Jason Wilcox , after having been part of the hierarchy that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince him to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas were resisted. However, these judgements carry more weight when delivered by a man with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, holder of international appearances and a contributor to a title-winning side 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 full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director speaks rarely publicly, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as him – simply operate on a plane exceeding our mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not the same as being prepared to comprehend it.

An Ultimate Authority Behind Command

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the modern United throne. Jason Wilcox is, after all, merely executing the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has emphasized his desire for a back four. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for United to embrace analytics and analytics. Per reports, in an executive meeting soon after his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach of play “shall be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his background in industry and sailing. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the wealthy are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally better. Who else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the building of a new stadium that looks a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

The New Football Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, visionary coach with ideas and energy to go into a club and see their vision supported to fruition. Yet how many businesses have such individuals established? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to place genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to determine the tactics by the directors and appoint a coach who will adapt their offering accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the product, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or fails to meet standards.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist 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 the Champions League and wins two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his standing damaged while those individuals who appointed him live to blunder another day.

A Neoliberal Game: Accountability for the Coaches

And perhaps in a small way this represents corporate governance at work: the rise of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions are always sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for using excessively 3-4-3. Bring in the process guy and then bin him for taking excessive time. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – are in charge.