🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear Ruben Amorim could survive a loss to Grimsby. Survive an important continental showpiece against a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive home defeats to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, squandering the team's best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach came at the executive and seems to have failed. The most distracted of readers will notice the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated his squad for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most feared sporting directors.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray the director in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been easy, based on his nine months of experience at Southampton, to regard him as merely a drudge within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with ex-colleague Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive earlier, he has proved himself as one of the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect that United’s mid-table rivals are now rightly wary.

The Tactical Clash Regarding System and Philosophy

For example, it was the director who having been part of the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, was instrumental in trying to persuade him to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps such directives carry more weight when issued by a man with the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually he might agree to outline his thought processes to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, without any penalty clause in place. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks publicly, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – men like Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, most likely all we would hear would be ultrasonic blips and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being ready to comprehend it.

An Ultimate Power In Command

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate superior the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to adopt data science and analytics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach to football “shall be determined by this group”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is an expert in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he remains immensely wealthy, and it is known, the wealthy are superior: more insightful, more wise, strategically brilliant, fundamentally better. Who else would you trust to manage an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that appears similar to an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

A Modern Soccer Order: Executives Over Coaches

This represents a shift that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. Historically, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – even footballers. Perhaps it was once feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to join an organization and see their vision through to completion. Yet how many businesses have such individuals set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Far preferable to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. Better by far to determine the tactics in the boardroom and hire someone who can tailor their methods accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really creating the food, yet finally accountable if it arrives cold or fails of the box.

Nowadays, their job is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of literal children into Europe and wins two medium-sized trophies, and effectively is dismissed for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And possibly in a small way this represents corporate governance in action: the rise of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose choices remain untouchable, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss them for using too much 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and then bin him for requiring too long. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the adults – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.