🔗 Share this article

Itranspired Ruben Amorim could survive a loss to lower-league opposition. Survive an important continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive home defeats against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to the team's best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, labeling his team the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed a single opponent with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. 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, the coach came at Jason Wilcox and appears to have failed. The most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated at his players for losing one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of one of the Premier League’s most intimidating sporting directors.

And frankly, this whole painful saga seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his brief stint in a similar role at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position largely to his close relationship with ex-colleague Omar Berrada as any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outsmarting United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless a previous executive before him, he has proved himself to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that the club's mid-table rivals are now rightly wary.

The Strategic Conflict Over Formation & Ideology

To illustrate, it was Jason Wilcox , after being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in attempting to convince him to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. However, these judgements hold greater authority when delivered by a man with the unimpeachable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, holder of international appearances and a role in a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his reasoning to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – men like him – function at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, probably all we would hear would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being ready to receive.

An Ultimate Power Behind the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, merely executing the commands of his ultimate line manager the billionaire owner, who in private has emphasized his desire for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to embrace analytics and analytics. Per reports, in an executive meeting soon after his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach of play “shall be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical football matters, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Who else would you trust to manage an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of Benjamin Sesko?

The New Football Order: Directors Above Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted major sporting choices to subordinate staff such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to join an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many businesses have such individuals established? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the guys with impressive LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the strategy by the directors and hire a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they have become more akin to delivery personnel: not creating the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or fails to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become less about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the public face for a club 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 finds his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

A Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And possibly in a small way this is simply neoliberalism at work: the elevation of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose choices are always untouchable, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the system coach and then dismiss him for playing excessively that system. Hire the project manager and later discard him for taking too long. And most importantly be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.