🔗 Share this article

Iturns out the manager could survive defeat by Grimsby. Survive an important continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood home defeats to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, undermining some of the club’s best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. You come at the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Unfortunately, like many a Premiership right-back in Blackburn’s championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and appears to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the irony here: a manager who frequently berated at his players for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most feared football executives.

And frankly, this whole painful saga appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view him as merely a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position as much to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, just as he bested the unfortunate a previous executive earlier, he has demonstrated as one of football's true generals: a strategic mind that United’s competitors will now be rightly wary.

A Tactical Conflict Over Formation & Ideology

For example, it was the director , after being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in attempting to convince him to ditch his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties were resisted. But perhaps such directives hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of international appearances and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he may be persuaded to outline his thought processes 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 seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as him – simply operate at a level exceeding our mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably all we would hear is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not equivalent to being prepared to comprehend it.

An Supreme Authority Behind the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the real power behind the modern United throne. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, merely executing the directives of his ultimate superior the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach to football “will be determined in this room”.

After all, Ratcliffe is a specialist in these intricate footballing stuff, leveraging his background in industry and yachting. Above all he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, fundamentally superior. Whom else would you trust to manage an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a new stadium that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

The Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted major sporting choices to subordinate staff like managers, scouts – players themselves. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to go into a club 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 genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the tactics by the directors and hire a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the food, but still finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or fails to meet standards.

In the meantime, their job has become not about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face for a club they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and wins two medium-sized trophies, and essentially gets sacked for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy finds his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him live to blunder another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance in action: the rise of a gilded elite who are infallible, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be sacked away without explanation. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then fire him for playing excessively that system. Bring in the project manager and then discard them for requiring excessive time. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.