🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear he was able to withstand losing against lower-league opposition. He weathered losing a crucial continental showpiece against one of the worst Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, squandering some of the club’s most promising academy products, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the poorest the club has ever seen. Yet, there existed one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight defender in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on the executive and seems to have missed. The most casual observer can see the irony here: a manager who frequently berated at his players for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing in the face of the intense pressure and animal charisma of a England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

And frankly, this entire bruising episode appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, based on his nine months of experience at Southampton, to view him as little more than a drudge in the United exoskeleton: a man 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. By masterfully outsmarting United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has proved himself to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind of which the club's mid-table rivals will now be rightly wary.

A Strategic Conflict Regarding Formation and Philosophy

For example, this was the director who being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach originally, was instrumental in trying to persuade him to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. However, such directives hold greater authority when issued from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, holder of international appearances and a role in a championship team from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he might agree to outline his reasoning publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked why Amorim is walking away with full compensation, without any penalty clause activated. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals in football – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate on a plane beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being ready to receive.

An Supreme Power In the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we overlook the true genius behind the modern United throne. The director is, in reality, merely executing the directives of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his desire for a back four. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also proposed deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for United to embrace data science and analytics. Per reports, in an executive meeting early in his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach to football “shall be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, leveraging his background in industry and yachting. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally better. Whom else would you trust to manage an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of a new striker?

The Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing at the elite levels of the game. For decades, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to subordinate staff such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to go into a club and see their vision supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with impressive professional resumes. Better by far to decide the strategy in the boardroom and appoint someone who can tailor their methods to suit. If managers were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to delivery personnel: not responsible for the product, but still ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, their job is increasingly less about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the visible figurehead for a club they can do little to influence. Enzo Maresca leads a team of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined while those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Coaches

And perhaps in a small way this represents corporate governance at work: the elevation of a privileged overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss him for playing too much that system. Bring in the project manager and then bin them for taking excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for the latest summer signings, for the fact that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.