🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear Ruben Amorim could survive losing against Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive home defeats against West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, squandering some of the club’s best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed a single opponent against whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to dance. You come at the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, similar to numerous top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and appears to have failed. Even the most casual observer can see the irony here: a coach who frequently berated at his players for failing in individual battles crumbling when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of a England's top division's most feared football executives.

And frankly, this whole painful saga seems to paint the director in a different perspective. It may have been tempting, given his nine months of experience with the Saints, to regard him as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position as much to his friendship with ex-colleague Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated manager, just as he bested the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, he has proved himself as one of football's strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect that United’s mid-table rivals are now justifiably concerned.

The Strategic Clash Over Formation and Philosophy

For example, this was Jason Wilcox , after being involved in the hierarchy that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. However, these judgements carry more weight when delivered from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to explain his reasoning publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like him – function at a level exceeding our mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite the same as being ready to receive.

The Supreme Power Behind the Throne

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for the club to embrace data science and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach of play “will be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in this technical football matters, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the rich are superior: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Whom else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that looks a lot like an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

The New Football Order: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier of the game. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously possible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with ideas and drive to join an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy by the directors and hire someone who can tailor their offering accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to delivery personnel: not really creating the product, but still finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly not about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face of an organisation they can do little to influence. Enzo Maresca leads a team of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his standing damaged while those individuals who appointed him live to blunder another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Accountability Only for the Few

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply neoliberalism at work: the rise of a privileged elite who are infallible, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be sacked away without explanation. Appoint the system coach only to dismiss him for using excessively 3-4-3. Bring in the process guy and then discard them for taking excessive time. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – remain in control.