🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear he could survive a loss to Grimsby. Survive losing a crucial European final versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood losing at home to domestic rivals, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, 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 a single opponent against whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to engage. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship campaign, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. The most distracted of readers can see the irony here: a manager who often railed his squad for losing individual battles crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of one of England's top division's most feared football executives.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to view him as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due as much to his close relationship with ex-colleague Omar Berrada as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the hapless a previous executive earlier, Jason Wilcox has proved himself as one of football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

The Tactical Conflict Regarding Formation and Ideology

For example, it was the director , after having been part of the leadership that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in trying to persuade him to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these pleas met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when issued by a man of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his thought processes to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as him – simply operate at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive is a series of high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being prepared to receive.

An Supreme Power In Command

Naturally, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, after all, merely executing the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also proposed deploying the forward as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach of play “shall be determined by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is a specialist in these intricate football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are superior: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Whom else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that looks similar to an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff such as coaches, talent spotters – even footballers. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, visionary coach with ideas 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? Far preferable to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy in the boardroom and appoint someone who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they have become more akin to delivery personnel: not responsible for the food, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist of the operation, the public face for a club they can do little to change. Enzo Maresca leads a team of literal children into Europe and secures domestic cups, and essentially gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

A Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And possibly in a small way this is simply corporate governance in action: the elevation of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always untouchable, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Hire the system coach only to dismiss them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and later bin him for requiring too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new summer signings, for the reality that the adults – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.