🔗 Share this article

Transpired the manager was able to withstand losing against lower-league opposition. Survive losing a crucial continental showpiece versus one of the worst Spurs sides for many years. He could survive losing at home against domestic rivals, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, squandering the team's most promising academy products, a poor winning percentage, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, similar to numerous top-flight defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship campaign, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. The most casual observer can see the irony here: a manager who often railed his squad for failing in individual battles crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and animal charisma of a England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

In truth, this entire painful saga appears to portray the director in a whole new light. It may have been easy, based on his nine months of experience with the Saints, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting United’s feted head coach, just as he bested the hapless Dan Ashworth before him, he has proved himself to be among the sport’s true generals: a tactical intellect of which the club's mid-table rivals are now rightly wary.

A Tactical Conflict Regarding System & Ideology

To illustrate, it was the director who having been part of the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach in the first place, was instrumental in trying to persuade him to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these pleas met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when issued by a man with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a role in a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise why Amorim is departing with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause activated. The director seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals of this sport – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being ready to receive.

The Supreme Authority In Command

But of course, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, merely executing the commands of his ultimate line manager the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his preference for a back four. It is reported, the owner has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to adopt analytics and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style to football “shall be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Above all he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the construction of a new stadium that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of Benjamin Sesko?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and energy to go into a club and see their vision through to completion. Yet how many companies have these guys established? What number of mass redundancies have they overseen? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the tactics in the boardroom and appoint a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the product, but still ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or fails to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly less 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 literal children into the Champions League and wins domestic cups, and essentially gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the elevation of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the system coach only to fire them for using excessively 3-4-3. Bring in the process guy and later bin them for requiring too long. And above all show gratitude; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – remain in control.