🔗 Share this article

Itranspired Ruben Amorim could survive a loss to Grimsby. Survive a decisive continental showpiece against a particularly poor Spurs sides for many years. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, squandering the team's most promising homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, calling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed a single opponent against whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to tango. You come at Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the irony here: a manager who often railed his squad for failing in individual battles crumbling in the face of the white heat and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most feared football executives.

And frankly, this whole painful saga appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. It may have been tempting, given his brief stint of experience with the Saints, to regard him as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting United’s feted manager, just as he bested the hapless Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated as one of the sport’s true generals: a strategic mind of which the club's competitors are now rightly wary.

The Strategic Clash Over System & Philosophy

To illustrate, this was Jason Wilcox , after having been part of the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim in the first place, played a key role in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Naturally, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, a veteran of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he might agree to outline his thought processes to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked why Amorim is departing with full compensation, without any penalty clause in place. The director speaks rarely in public, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – simply operate on a plane exceeding our mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, probably all we would hear would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not quite the same as being ready to receive.

The Ultimate Power In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the modern United throne. Jason Wilcox is, after all, merely executing the commands of his line manager the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to embrace analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he announced that United’s style of play “shall be decided by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, more wise, strategically brilliant, fundamentally better. Whom else could one trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This represents a shift that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. Historically, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously possible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and drive to go into an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. Yet how many businesses have these guys established? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the guys with impressive LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the strategy in the boardroom and hire a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not creating the food, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out to meet standards.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the visible figurehead for a club they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy sees his reputation ruined whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Modern Corporate Game: Accountability for the Coaches

And possibly in a small way this represents neoliberalism in action: the elevation of a gilded elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always untouchable, whose errors can always be sacked away without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to fire them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Bring in the process guy and later discard them for taking too long. And most importantly be grateful; for your modest season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the fact that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.