🔗 Share this article

Turns out Ruben Amorim was able to withstand a loss to Grimsby. Survive losing a crucial continental showpiece against one of the worst Spurs sides in living memory. He withstood home defeats against domestic rivals, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, squandering some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling his team the worst the club has ever seen. But there was one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to tango. You come at the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. The most distracted of readers will notice the paradoxical situation: a coach who often railed at his players for failing in individual battles succumbing in the face of the intense pressure and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

And frankly, this entire bruising episode appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his brief stint of experience with the Saints, to view Jason Wilcox as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man who owed his position as much to his close relationship with his former boss Omar Berrada rather than any verifiable talent. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that the club's competitors are now rightly wary.

A Tactical Clash Over Formation & Philosophy

For example, it was the director , after having been part of the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, was instrumental in attempting to convince him to ditch his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. However, these judgements hold greater authority when delivered by a man with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually he might agree to outline his reasoning to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, with no penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as him – function at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, most likely all we would hear is a series of high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being prepared to comprehend it.

The Supreme 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, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has made very clear his preference for a back four. It is reported, the owner 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, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style of play “shall be determined by this group”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally better. Whom else could one trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that appears similar to an abstract design, the signing of Benjamin Sesko?

The New Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier of the game. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff such as coaches, scouts – even footballers. Maybe previously 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 companies have such individuals established? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the guys with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy in the boardroom and appoint someone who will adapt their offering accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the product, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly less about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the visible figurehead for a club they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into Europe and secures domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his standing damaged while the people who hired him continue to make errors another day.

The Modern Corporate Football: Accountability Only for the Few

And possibly on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance in action: the elevation of a privileged elite who are infallible, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose errors can invariably be sacked away without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for using too much 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and then discard him for requiring too long. And most importantly show gratitude; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.