🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear the manager endured a loss to Grimsby. He weathered a decisive continental showpiece against one of the worst Spurs sides in living memory. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, squandering some of the club’s best academy products, the 32% win rate, labeling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed a single opponent against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, Amorim came at the executive and appears to have failed. Even the most casual observer will notice the irony here: a manager who often railed at his players for failing in individual battles succumbing in the face of the white heat and animal charisma of a the Premier League’s most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this entire bruising episode seems to paint the director in a whole new light. It may have been tempting, given his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to view him as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position as much to his friendship with his former boss Omar Berrada as any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the hapless Dan Ashworth earlier, he has demonstrated to be among football's true generals: a strategic mind that United’s competitors will now be rightly wary.

A Strategic Clash Regarding System & Ideology

To illustrate, it was Jason Wilcox , after being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim originally, was instrumental in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. However, such directives hold greater authority when delivered by a man with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause activated. The director speaks rarely in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – men like him – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being prepared to comprehend it.

The Supreme Power In Command

But of course, in training our focus on Jason Wilcox we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also proposed deploying the forward in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for United to adopt analytics and metrics. Per reports, during a leadership summit early in his investment, he declared that the team's approach of play “will be determined in this room”.

After all, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his background in industry and sailing. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply superior. Who else could one trust to manage a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that appears a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

The Modern Football Order: Directors Above Coaches

This represents a shift that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to subordinate staff like managers, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously possible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to go into an organization and implement their plan through to completion. But how many businesses have such individuals set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to decide the tactics by the directors and appoint a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they have become more like Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the food, but still finally accountable if it arrives poorly or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to change. Enzo Maresca leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy sees his standing damaged while those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

A Modern Corporate Football: Accountability Only for the Coaches

And perhaps in a small way this represents neoliberalism at work: the elevation of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the system coach only to dismiss them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and later discard him for requiring too long. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.