🔗 Share this article

Turns out Ruben Amorim was able to withstand a loss to lower-league opposition. He weathered losing a crucial European final against a particularly poor Spurs sides for many years. He could survive home defeats against West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling his team the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to engage. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight defender in Blackburn’s championship 1994-95 season, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated his squad for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and animal charisma of a England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray the director in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view him as merely a drudge in the United exoskeleton: a man who owed his position as much to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How wrong we all were. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the hapless Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has proved himself as one of football's true generals: a strategic mind of which United’s mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

The Strategic Conflict Regarding Formation and Ideology

For example, this was the director , after being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, played a key role in attempting to convince Amorim to ditch his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. However, such directives hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side decades past.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to outline his thought processes to the rest of us. Maybe one day he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – function on a plane beyond our own prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not the same as being prepared to receive.

The Supreme Power Behind the Throne

Naturally, 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, merely executing the directives of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to adopt analytics and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit early in his investment, he announced that United’s style of play “shall be determined by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate football matters, leveraging his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, sagacious, strategically brilliant, fundamentally better. Whom else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that looks a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

The New Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted major sporting choices to low-level employees like managers, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to go into an organization and implement their plan through to completion. But how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. Better by far to determine the strategy by the directors and appoint a coach who will adapt their methods accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not really creating the food, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or fails to meet standards.

Nowadays, their job has become less 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 change. Enzo Maresca takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy sees his reputation ruined whereas the people who appointed him live to blunder indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Game: Accountability Only for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this represents corporate governance at work: the elevation of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose choices remain untouchable, whose errors can always be sacked away without explanation. Hire the system coach and then fire him for using too much that system. Bring in the process guy and later discard him for requiring excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.