🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear Ruben Amorim endured a loss to Grimsby. He weathered a decisive European final against a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive home defeats to domestic rivals, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, squandering the team's best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary against whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to tango. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the irony here: a manager who frequently berated at his players for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of one of England's top division's most feared football executives.

In truth, this whole bruising episode seems to paint the director in a different perspective. It may have been easy, given his brief stint of experience with the Saints, to regard him as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with his former boss Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has proved himself as one of football's true generals: a strategic mind that United’s mid-table rivals are now rightly wary.

The Tactical Conflict Over Formation and Philosophy

For example, this was Jason Wilcox who having been part of the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim in the first place, played a key role in attempting to convince Amorim to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Naturally, these pleas faced pushback. However, these judgements hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his reasoning publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, with no penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – function on a plane exceeding our mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being prepared to comprehend it.

An Ultimate Power In the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we are obscuring the real power behind the modern United throne. The director is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also proposed deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace data science and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style of play “will be determined by this group”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, leveraging his previous experience in industry and yachting. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a modern arena that appears similar to an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

The New Football Hierarchy: Executives Above Managers

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted major sporting choices to subordinate staff like managers, scouts – even footballers. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, visionary coach with ideas and energy to join an organization and implement their plan through to completion. But how many companies have these guys set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to place genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to determine the tactics by the directors and hire a coach who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the product, yet finally accountable should it be delivered cold or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the public face of an organisation 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 gets sacked for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him live to blunder indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Few

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who can never be wrong, whose choices are always sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the system coach and then fire him for playing too much that system. Bring in the process guy and then discard them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the adults – however well qualified – remain in control.