🔗 Share this article

Itranspired Ruben Amorim could survive losing against lower-league opposition. He weathered a decisive European final against a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood home defeats against domestic rivals, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, undermining some of the club’s best academy products, the 32% win rate, calling his team the poorest 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, similar to numerous Premiership defender in Blackburn’s championship campaign, Amorim took on the executive and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated his squad for failing in individual battles succumbing when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of a the Premier League’s most intimidating sporting directors.

In truth, this whole bruising episode seems to paint the director in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man who owed his position as much to his friendship with ex-colleague Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, just as he bested the hapless a previous executive before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect that the club's competitors will now be rightly wary.

A Strategic Conflict Regarding Formation and Philosophy

For example, this was the director who having been part of the leadership that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince him to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Naturally, these entreaties faced pushback. However, these judgements carry more weight when issued by a man of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, with no compensation reduction clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – function on a plane beyond our own prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, probably all we would hear would be high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not the same as being ready to receive.

The Ultimate Authority Behind the Throne

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his ultimate superior the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace analytics and analytics. Per reports, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he announced that the team's approach to football “will be determined in this room”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical football matters, leveraging his previous experience in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else would you trust to manage a strategic plan of austerity, the construction of a new stadium that looks a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of a new striker?

The Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This represents a shift that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to subordinate staff such as coaches, scouts – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to join a club and implement their plan supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have such individuals established? How many large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to place the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. It is wiser to determine the tactics by the directors and hire a coach who can tailor their offering to suit. If managers were once chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not responsible for the product, yet ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or leaks out to meet standards.

Nowadays, their job is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into Europe and secures domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

A Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this is simply neoliberalism at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose choices are always untouchable, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for playing too much that system. Bring in the process guy and then discard them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the adults – however well qualified – remain in control.