🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear Ruben Amorim endured losing against Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial continental showpiece against one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive losing at home against domestic rivals, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to engage. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous Premiership right-back in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and seems to have missed. The most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated at his players for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of a England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this whole painful saga 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 view him as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: a man whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the hapless a previous executive earlier, he has demonstrated as one of the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which United’s competitors will now be rightly wary.

A Strategic Clash Over Formation and Ideology

To illustrate, it was the director who having been part of the hierarchy that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach originally, was instrumental in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these pleas faced pushback. However, such directives hold greater authority when issued by a man with the impeccable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a championship team from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to explain his thought processes to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, with no penalty clause in place. The director speaks rarely in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – function at a level exceeding our mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not the same as being ready to receive.

The Supreme Authority Behind Command

Naturally, in training our focus on Jason Wilcox we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, merely executing the directives of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace data science and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his investment, he announced that the team's approach to football “will be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical football matters, drawing from his previous experience in industry and sailing. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, strategically brilliant, fundamentally superior. Whom else could one trust to manage an enlightened programme of austerity, the building of a new stadium that looks a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

The Modern Soccer Order: Executives Over Managers

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing at the elite levels of the game. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to go into an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many companies have these guys established? How many mass redundancies have they managed? Better by far to place genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to determine the tactics in the boardroom and hire a coach who will adapt their methods accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not responsible for the food, yet ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or fails to meet standards.

In the meantime, their job is increasingly not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

A Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this is simply corporate governance at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without explanation. Hire the system coach and then fire them for using excessively that system. Bring in the process guy and later discard them for requiring too long. And above all be grateful; for your modest season ticket price rises, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.