🔗 Share this article

Transpired the manager could survive defeat by Grimsby. Survive an important European final versus one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, laying waste to the team's most promising homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to engage. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a Premiership defender during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and appears to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the irony here: a coach who often railed at his players for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and animal charisma of one of the Premier League’s most feared football executives.

And frankly, this whole painful saga seems to paint the director in a whole new light. It may have been easy, given his nine months of experience at Southampton, to view him as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting United’s feted head coach, just as he bested the unfortunate a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated to be among football's true generals: a tactical intellect that the club's competitors are now rightly wary.

The Tactical Conflict Regarding System & Ideology

For example, it was the director who being involved in the leadership that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach in the first place, played a key role in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas were resisted. However, these judgements carry more weight when issued from the mouth with the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a championship team from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked why Amorim is departing with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause activated. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks publicly, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate on a plane exceeding our prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, probably all we would hear is a series of high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being ready to receive.

The Supreme Authority In the Throne

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the real power behind the modern United throne. The director is, after all, merely executing the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has emphasized his desire for a four-man defense. It is reported, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for the club to embrace data science and analytics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his minority ownership, he declared that United’s style of play “shall be determined by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the wealthy are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Who else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that appears similar to an abstract design, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Above Managers

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff like managers, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to join a club and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many businesses have these guys set up? How many mass redundancies have they managed? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to determine the tactics by the directors and appoint someone who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not creating the food, yet finally accountable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, their job has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the visible figurehead for a club they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of literal children into the Champions League and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Few

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions are always untouchable, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and later bin them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.