🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear the manager was able to withstand a loss to lower-league opposition. Survive losing a crucial continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood losing at home to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, laying waste to the team's best academy products, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was a single opponent against whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to dance. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. Even the most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed at his players for failing in individual battles crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of a England's top division's most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this whole bruising episode seems to paint the director in a different perspective. It may have been tempting, based on his brief stint in a similar role with the Saints, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due largely 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 unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind of which the club's mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

The Tactical Clash Regarding System and Ideology

For example, it was Jason Wilcox who being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in attempting to convince him to ditch his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas met a certain resistance. However, such directives hold greater authority when delivered by a man with the unimpeachable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his reasoning publicly. Maybe one day he might be asked why Amorim is walking away with a full payout, with no penalty clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – function on a plane beyond our own prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being ready to receive.

An Supreme Power Behind the Throne

Naturally, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the real power behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to adopt data science and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he announced that the team's approach to football “will be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and as we all know, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, sagacious, more tactically astute, simply superior. Who else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the building of a new stadium that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, scouts – even footballers. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to join an organization and see their vision through to completion. Yet how many businesses have these guys established? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Better by far to invest the real power where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to determine the tactics in the boardroom and hire a coach who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the product, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the public face of an organisation they have minimal power to change. Enzo Maresca takes a squad of literal children into Europe and wins domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism in action: the elevation of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without explanation. Hire the system coach only to fire them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and then discard him for taking excessive time. And above all be grateful; for your modest season ticket price rises, for the latest summer signings, for the fact that the grownups – however well qualified – are in charge.