🔗 Share this article

Iturns out Ruben Amorim was able to withstand a loss to Grimsby. Survive a decisive continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Spurs sides for many years. He could survive home defeats against domestic rivals, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, undermining some of the club’s best academy products, the 32% win rate, calling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed a single opponent against whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to engage. You come at the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. Even the most casual observer will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated at his players for losing one-on-one duels crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of a the Premier League’s most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his brief stint of experience with the Saints, to view him as little more than a drudge within the club's structure: a man who owed his position as much to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, he has demonstrated to be among football's true generals: a tactical intellect that United’s mid-table rivals are now rightly wary.

A Tactical Clash Regarding System & Philosophy

To illustrate, it was the director who having been part of the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his beloved formation. Naturally, these pleas were resisted. However, such directives carry more weight when delivered from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his reasoning publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, without any penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely publicly, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers of this sport – men like him – simply operate at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being prepared to comprehend it.

The Ultimate Power In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for United to adopt data science and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting early in his minority ownership, he declared that United’s style of play “will be determined in this room”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his previous experience in industry and sailing. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, more wise, strategically brilliant, fundamentally superior. Whom else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Football Order: Directors Over Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier of the game. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted major sporting choices to subordinate staff like managers, scouts – 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 supported to fruition. Yet how many businesses have such individuals set up? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Better by far to place genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. It is wiser to determine the tactics by the directors and appoint someone who will adapt their offering accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not really creating the product, yet finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the public face for a club they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for speaking out. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who appointed him live to blunder indefinitely.

A Modern Corporate Football: Accountability Only for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this is simply corporate governance in action: the elevation of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose choices remain untouchable, whose mistakes can invariably be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach only to fire him for using too much that system. Hire the project manager and later discard him for requiring too long. And most importantly show gratitude; for your modest season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – remain in control.