🔗 Share this article

Itranspired the manager could survive losing against lower-league opposition. He weathered a decisive European final versus a particularly poor Spurs sides in living memory. He withstood home defeats to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, laying waste to some of the club’s best academy products, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to tango. If you challenge the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim came at the executive and appears to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed at his players for losing individual battles succumbing when confronted by 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. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his brief stint of experience with the Saints, to view Jason Wilcox as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with his former boss Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated as one of the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which the club's mid-table rivals are now justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Conflict Regarding Formation and Ideology

To illustrate, it was the director who being involved in the leadership that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, was instrumental in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his favored formation. Naturally, these pleas faced pushback. However, these judgements carry more weight when delivered from the mouth with the unimpeachable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, holder of international appearances and a role in a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually he might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, without any penalty clause in place. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like him – function at a level exceeding our mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear is a series of ultrasonic blips and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not equivalent to being prepared to receive.

The Ultimate Power In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the modern United throne. The director is, after all, merely executing the directives of his line manager the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace analytics and analytics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting early in his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach of play “shall be decided in this room”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he remains immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the rich are superior: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else would you trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that looks a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of a new striker?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier of the game. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, scouts – even footballers. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, innovative manager with a philosophy and energy to go into an organization and implement their plan supported to fruition. Yet how many businesses have these guys established? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to place genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to determine the strategy by the directors and appoint someone who can tailor their methods to suit. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more akin to delivery personnel: not responsible for the product, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and wins two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply neoliberalism in action: the elevation of a gilded overclass who are infallible, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose mistakes can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and then bin them for requiring excessive time. And above all show gratitude; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.