🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear the manager could survive losing against Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial European final against a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, squandering the team's best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, labeling his team the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. If you challenge the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership right-back in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer will notice the irony here: a manager who frequently berated at his players for losing individual battles succumbing when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of one of England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

The Strategic Conflict Over System & Philosophy

To illustrate, it was the director who being involved in the leadership that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach in the first place, played a key role in trying to persuade him to abandon his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas were resisted. However, such directives hold greater authority when issued from the mouth with the unimpeachable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually he might agree to explain his reasoning to the rest of us. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, with no compensation reduction clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – men like Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely all we would hear would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being ready to comprehend it.

The Ultimate Power Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for United to adopt data science and metrics. Per reports, in an executive meeting early in his investment, he announced that the team's approach to football “shall be determined by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are superior: more perceptive, sagacious, more tactically astute, simply superior. Whom else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a modern arena that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

The Modern Football Order: Executives Above Managers

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted major sporting choices to subordinate staff such as coaches, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and drive to join a club and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many companies have these guys set up? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Better by far to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to determine the strategy in the boardroom and appoint a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If managers were once chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the food, yet finally accountable if it arrives poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, their job is increasingly not 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 change. Enzo Maresca leads a team of literal children into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who hired him continue to make errors another day.

A Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance in action: the rise of a gilded overclass who are infallible, whose choices are always untouchable, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss him for playing excessively that system. Bring in the project manager and then discard him for taking excessive time. And most importantly show gratitude; for your modest season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the adults – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.