🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear he endured defeat by Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood losing at home to domestic rivals, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the worst the club has ever seen. Yet, there existed one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, similar to numerous Premiership defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, Amorim took on the executive and seems to have missed. The most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed at his players for losing one-on-one duels succumbing when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of a England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode seems to paint the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role with the Saints, to regard him as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive earlier, he has proved himself to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that United’s competitors are now rightly wary.

A Tactical Conflict Regarding System and Ideology

For example, this was the director who being involved in the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim originally, was instrumental in trying to persuade him to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when issued from the mouth with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his reasoning publicly. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, with no penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – function at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, most likely we would perceive is a series of high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Wanting is not the same as being ready to receive.

The Ultimate Power Behind the Throne

Naturally, in training our focus on Jason Wilcox we overlook the real power behind the modern United throne. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, 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. The owner is eager for the club to adopt data science and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style to football “will be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, strategically brilliant, fundamentally superior. Whom else would you trust to manage an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the construction of a modern arena that looks similar to an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

The Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. Historically, clubs foolishly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees like managers, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously possible for a young, innovative manager with a philosophy and energy to join a club and implement their plan through to completion. But how many companies have these guys established? What number of mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy in the boardroom and appoint someone who can tailor their methods to suit. If managers were once chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not creating the product, but still ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into Europe and wins two medium-sized trophies, and essentially gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who hired him live to blunder indefinitely.

A Neoliberal Football: Accountability Only for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply neoliberalism in action: the rise of a gilded elite who are infallible, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose mistakes can invariably be sacked away without justification. Appoint the system coach and then dismiss them for using excessively 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and then bin them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – are in charge.