🔗 Share this article

Itranspired he endured losing against lower-league opposition. He weathered a decisive European final against one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood losing at home against domestic rivals, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, undermining some of the club’s best academy products, a poor winning percentage, calling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to dance. You come at Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous Premiership right-back in Blackburn’s championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and appears to have failed. The most casual observer will notice the irony here: a manager who often railed his squad for failing in individual battles crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and animal charisma of one of the Premier League’s most feared football executives.

And frankly, this whole painful saga seems to paint the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: a man who owed his position largely to his friendship with his former boss Omar Berrada as any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting United’s feted head coach, just as he bested the unfortunate a previous executive earlier, he has demonstrated as one of the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind of which United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Conflict Over System and Ideology

To illustrate, it was the director who being involved in the leadership that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim in the first place, played a key role in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his favored formation. Naturally, these entreaties were resisted. However, these judgements hold greater authority when issued from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his thought processes publicly. Maybe one day questions may arise why Amorim is walking away with full compensation, with no penalty clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – function on a plane exceeding our mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, probably all we would hear is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite the same as being prepared to receive.

The Supreme Power In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his superior the billionaire owner, who in private has made very clear his preference for a back four. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for the club to adopt analytics and metrics. Per reports, in an executive meeting early in his investment, he announced that the team's approach of play “will be determined in this room”.

After all, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical football matters, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy 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 appears similar to an abstract design, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

The New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. Historically, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to subordinate staff like managers, scouts – even footballers. Perhaps it was once feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with ideas and drive to go into an organization and see their vision through to completion. But how many businesses have such individuals set up? What number of large-scale layoffs have they managed? Far preferable to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. Better by far to determine the strategy in the boardroom and hire someone who can tailor their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not really responsible for the food, but still ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or leaks out of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing 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 secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively is dismissed for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Game: Accountability Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the elevation of a gilded elite who are infallible, whose choices are always untouchable, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for using too much that system. Hire the project manager and later bin them for requiring too long. And most importantly be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.