🔗 Share this article

Itranspired Ruben Amorim endured losing against Grimsby. Survive a decisive continental showpiece against a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood losing at home to domestic rivals, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, squandering the team's most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling his team the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to tango. You come at the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach came at Jason Wilcox and appears to have missed. The most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who often railed at his players for losing individual battles crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of a England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

In truth, this entire bruising episode appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his nine months of experience with the Saints, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a drudge within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, he has demonstrated to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that the club's mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Conflict Over System & Philosophy

For example, it was the director who having been part of the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, played a key role in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these pleas met a certain resistance. But perhaps such directives hold greater authority when issued by a man of a man the unimpeachable soccer background he possesses, holder of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to outline his thought processes to the rest of us. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as him – simply operate at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, probably all we would hear is a series of high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being prepared to comprehend it.

An Supreme Power In Command

But of course, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the directives of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for United to adopt data science and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his investment, he announced that the team's approach to football “will be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and as we all know, the rich are the best of us: more perceptive, more wise, strategically brilliant, simply superior. Who else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the building of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of a new striker?

A New Football Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees such as coaches, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with ideas and energy to join a club and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many businesses have these guys set up? What number of mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. Better by far to decide the tactics by the directors and hire someone who will adapt their offering accordingly. If managers were once chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the product, but still finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or leaks out to meet standards.

Nowadays, their job is increasingly less about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the public face of an organisation they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively is dismissed for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his standing damaged whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Accountability Only for the Few

And possibly on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance at work: the elevation of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose choices remain untouchable, whose mistakes can invariably be sacked away without justification. Appoint the system coach and then dismiss him for playing excessively 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and later bin them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the adults – however well qualified – remain in control.