🔗 Share this article

Turns out Ruben Amorim was able to withstand losing against Grimsby. He weathered a decisive European final versus a particularly poor Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive home defeats to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, squandering some of the club’s best homegrown talent, 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 engage. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back in Blackburn’s championship 1994-95 season, the coach came at Jason Wilcox and appears to have failed. The most casual observer will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated his squad for losing one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of a the Premier League’s most intimidating sporting directors.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray the director in a different perspective. It may have been easy, given his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to view him as merely a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has proved himself as one of the sport’s true generals: a tactical intellect that United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

The Tactical Clash Regarding Formation & Philosophy

For example, this was the director , after being involved in the hierarchy that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince him to ditch his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. However, such directives hold greater authority when issued by a man of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a role in a championship team from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his thought processes 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. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks publicly, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – men like him – simply operate on a plane exceeding our prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being prepared to receive.

The Ultimate Power In Command

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has emphasized his desire for a back four. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to adopt analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach to football “shall be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is a specialist in these intricate football matters, leveraging his previous experience in industry and sailing. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, more tactically astute, simply superior. Who else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of a new striker?

A Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier of the game. Historically, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees like managers, scouts – players themselves. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and drive to join an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many companies have these guys set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Far preferable to place the real power where it belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. Better by far to decide the strategy in the boardroom and hire a coach who can tailor their offering to suit. If coaches were formerly chefs, they have become more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not creating the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face for a club they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and wins two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined while those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance in action: the elevation of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose choices remain untouchable, whose mistakes can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the system coach only to fire him for playing excessively that system. Bring in the process guy and later discard them for taking too long. And above all show gratitude; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.