🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear Ruben Amorim was able to withstand defeat by lower-league opposition. Survive a decisive European final versus one of the worst Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive losing at home against domestic rivals, a lowly league position, his rigid approach, undermining some of the club’s best academy products, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest the club has ever seen. But there was one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to engage. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim came at the executive and appears to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed at his players for failing in individual battles crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of a England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

In truth, this whole painful saga appears to portray the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role with the Saints, to view Jason Wilcox as merely a drudge within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with his former boss Omar Berrada rather than any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated to be among the sport’s true generals: a tactical intellect that the club's mid-table rivals are now justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Clash Regarding System & Ideology

For example, this was the director , after having been part of the hierarchy that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim originally, played a key role in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps such directives hold greater authority when issued by a man of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, holder 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 to the rest of us. Maybe one day he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, without any penalty clause activated. The director seldom speaks publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like him – function on a plane beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive is a series of ultrasonic blips and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being prepared to receive.

An Ultimate Authority In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his desire for a back four. It is reported, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace data science and analytics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach to football “will be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his background in industry and yachting. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, simply superior. Whom else would you trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that appears a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

A Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing at the elite levels of the game. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff such as coaches, talent spotters – even footballers. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and drive to join an organization and implement their plan supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have such individuals established? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to place genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy by the directors and appoint a coach who can tailor their offering accordingly. If managers were once chefs, they are now more akin to delivery personnel: not responsible for the food, but still finally accountable should it be delivered cold or fails to meet standards.

Nowadays, their job has become not about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the public face of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and essentially is dismissed for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism at work: the rise of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always untouchable, whose mistakes can invariably be sacked away without justification. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss them for playing too much 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and later discard them for requiring excessive time. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.