🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear he was able to withstand a loss to lower-league opposition. He weathered an important European final versus one of the worst Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood home defeats to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, squandering the team's best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to dance. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, similar to numerous top-flight right-back in Blackburn’s championship campaign, the coach came at the executive and appears to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated his squad for failing in individual battles succumbing when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most feared football executives.

In truth, this whole painful saga appears to portray Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, based on his brief stint of experience with the Saints, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a drudge within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with his former boss Omar Berrada rather than any verifiable talent. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind of which United’s competitors are now justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Clash Regarding System and Ideology

For example, this was the director who being involved in the hierarchy that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach in the first place, played a key role in attempting to convince him to ditch his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas were resisted. However, such directives hold greater authority when issued from the mouth with the unimpeachable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, a veteran of international appearances and a contributor to a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he may be persuaded to explain his thought processes to the rest of us. Maybe one day he might be asked why Amorim is departing with full compensation, without any penalty clause in place. The director speaks rarely in public, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals of this sport – individuals such as him – function on a plane exceeding our mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not quite equivalent to being ready to comprehend it.

The Supreme Authority Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the true genius behind the modern United throne. The director is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his desire for a four-man defense. It is reported, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to adopt data science and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach to football “will be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, sagacious, more tactically astute, fundamentally better. Whom else could one trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a new stadium that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of a new striker?

The New Soccer Order: Executives Over Managers

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to join an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many businesses have such individuals established? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to invest the real power where it belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the tactics in the boardroom and appoint a coach who can tailor their offering accordingly. If managers were once chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really creating the product, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the receptionist on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and effectively is dismissed for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

A Neoliberal Football: Accountability for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance at work: the elevation of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can invariably be sacked away without justification. Appoint the system coach only to fire him for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and then discard him for requiring excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.