🔗 Share this article

Itranspired he could survive losing against Grimsby. Survive an important European final against one of the worst Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to the team's most promising academy products, the 32% win rate, calling his team the worst the club has ever seen. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. You come at Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim came at Jason Wilcox and appears to have missed. Even the most casual observer will notice the irony here: a coach who frequently berated at his players for losing one-on-one duels succumbing in the face of the white heat and animal charisma of a England's top division's most feared football executives.

And frankly, this entire bruising episode appears to portray the director in a whole new light. It may have been tempting, based on his brief stint in a similar role at Southampton, to regard him as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with his former boss Omar Berrada as any verifiable talent. How wrong we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive earlier, he has demonstrated to be among the sport’s true generals: a tactical intellect that United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Clash Over System & Philosophy

For example, it was the director , after having been part of the hierarchy that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim in the first place, played a key role in trying to persuade him to abandon his favored formation. Naturally, these pleas met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when issued by a man with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually he may be persuaded to explain his thought processes publicly. Maybe one day he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, without any penalty clause in place. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like him – simply operate at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, most likely we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being prepared to receive.

The Supreme Power Behind Command

Naturally, in training our focus on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the real power behind the modern United throne. The director is, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has made very clear his desire for a four-man defense. According to reports, the owner has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he declared that United’s style of play “will be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in these intricate footballing stuff, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the wealthy are superior: more insightful, sagacious, strategically brilliant, simply better. Whom else would you trust to manage an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a new stadium that looks a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of a new striker?

A Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff like managers, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to go into a club and implement their plan through to completion. Yet how many businesses have such individuals established? How many mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to place genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the guys with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. Better by far to determine the strategy by the directors and hire a coach who will adapt their offering accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not really creating the product, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out to meet standards.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly not about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the public face of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and essentially is dismissed for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his standing damaged whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this is simply corporate governance at work: the rise of a gilded elite who are infallible, whose decisions are always sacrosanct, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach only to fire them for using too much 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and then discard them for requiring too long. And most importantly show gratitude; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.