🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear the manager could survive losing against Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive home defeats against West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, undermining some of the club’s best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to tango. You come at Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and seems to have missed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the irony here: a coach who frequently berated his squad for failing in individual battles succumbing when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of a the Premier League’s most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this whole bruising episode seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. It may have been easy, based on his brief stint in a similar role with the Saints, to regard him as little more than a drudge within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due as much to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated to be among football's true generals: a tactical intellect that United’s mid-table rivals are now justifiably concerned.

The Tactical Clash Over System & Philosophy

For example, it was the director who being involved in the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach originally, played a key role in trying to persuade him to ditch his favored formation. Naturally, these pleas faced pushback. But perhaps such directives carry more weight when delivered by a man with the impeccable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, holder of international appearances and a role in a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his reasoning publicly. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, without any penalty clause in place. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals in football – men like him – simply operate on a plane beyond our own mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, probably we would perceive would be ultrasonic blips and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not the same as being ready to comprehend it.

The Ultimate Power Behind the Throne

Naturally, in training our focus on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, merely executing the directives of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his preference for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace data science and analytics. Per reports, in an executive meeting soon after his minority ownership, he declared that United’s style to football “shall be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, leveraging his previous experience in industry and yachting. Above all he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, strategically brilliant, simply better. Whom else would you trust to oversee an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of a new striker?

The New Football Order: Directors Above Managers

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff like managers, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously possible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with ideas and drive to go into a club and see their vision through to completion. But how many companies have such individuals set up? How many mass redundancies have they managed? Better by far to place the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. Better by far to decide the strategy in the boardroom and appoint someone who can tailor their methods to suit. If coaches were once chefs, they are now more akin to delivery personnel: not responsible for the product, yet finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or fails of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role has become less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of literal children into Europe and wins two medium-sized trophies, and essentially gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who hired him live to blunder indefinitely.

A Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the rise of a gilded elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always sacrosanct, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach only to fire them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and later bin him for taking excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.