🔗 Share this article

Itranspired he was able to withstand losing against Grimsby. He weathered a decisive continental showpiece against one of the worst Spurs sides for many years. He could survive losing at home to domestic rivals, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to the team's best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Unfortunately, like many a Premiership defender during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, Amorim came at Jason Wilcox and appears to have missed. The most distracted of readers will notice the irony here: a coach who often railed at his players for losing one-on-one duels crumbling when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this whole bruising episode appears to portray the director in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to regard Jason Wilcox as little more than a functionary within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with his former boss Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How wrong we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless Dan Ashworth earlier, he has proved himself as one of the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which United’s mid-table rivals are now rightly wary.

A Tactical Clash Regarding System & Ideology

For example, this was the director , after having been part of the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, played a key role in trying to persuade him to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these pleas faced pushback. But perhaps such directives carry more weight when issued from the mouth with the unimpeachable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, with no penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – simply operate on a plane beyond our own prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, most likely we would perceive is a series of ultrasonic blips and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being ready to comprehend it.

An Supreme Power In Command

Naturally, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his line manager the billionaire owner, who privately has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for United to embrace analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he declared that the team's approach to football “shall be determined by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical football matters, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Above all he remains immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, sagacious, more tactically astute, simply better. Who else could one trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the building of a modern arena that looks a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This represents a shift that is becoming prevalent in top-tier of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously possible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and energy to join an organization and see their vision through to completion. But how many companies have these guys set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Better by far to invest the real power where it belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to decide the tactics by the directors and appoint someone who can tailor their offering to suit. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not creating the food, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the receptionist of the operation, the public face of an organisation they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of literal children into Europe and secures domestic cups, and essentially is dismissed for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined while the people who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

A Neoliberal Game: Responsibility Only for the Few

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism in action: the elevation of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions are always sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be sacked away without justification. Hire the system coach only to fire them for using too much that system. Bring in the process guy and then discard him for taking excessive time. And most importantly show gratitude; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for your new summer signings, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.