🔗 Share this article

Iturns out Ruben Amorim was able to withstand a loss to Grimsby. He weathered a decisive continental showpiece against a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, laying waste to the team's most promising homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to dance. You come at the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning campaign, Amorim came at the executive and appears to have missed. The most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed his squad for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of a the Premier League’s most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this whole bruising episode seems to paint the director in a different perspective. It may have been easy, based on his nine months of experience at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man who owed his position largely to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. By masterfully outsmarting United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that the club's competitors are now justifiably concerned.

The Tactical Clash Regarding System and Ideology

For example, this was the director , after being involved in the hierarchy that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach in the first place, played a key role in attempting to convince him to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties were resisted. However, these judgements hold greater authority when issued from the mouth of a man the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he might agree to explain his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, with no compensation reduction clause in place. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals in football – individuals such as him – function on a plane beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive is a series of high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not the same as being prepared to comprehend it.

An Supreme Power Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his desire for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit early in his investment, he announced that the team's approach of play “shall be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical football matters, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else could one trust to manage an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of a new striker?

The Modern Soccer Order: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and drive to join an organization and implement their plan through to completion. But how many companies have such individuals established? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Far preferable to place genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the guys with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. Better by far to determine the tactics by the directors and hire someone who will adapt their methods to suit. If coaches were once chefs, they have become more like Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist on the front desk, the public face for a club they can do little to influence. Enzo Maresca takes a squad of literal children into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined whereas the people who appointed him live to blunder indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps in a small way this represents neoliberalism at work: the rise of a gilded elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the system coach only to fire them for playing too much that system. Bring in the process guy and then discard them for taking too long. And above all show gratitude; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.