🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear the manager could survive defeat by lower-league opposition. He weathered an important European final against a particularly poor Spurs sides for many years. He could survive home defeats to West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising academy products, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to tango. You come at the sporting director, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning campaign, Amorim took on the executive and seems to have failed. The most casual observer will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated his squad for losing individual battles succumbing when confronted by the white heat and animal charisma of one of the Premier League’s most feared football executives.

In truth, this entire painful saga seems to paint the director in a different perspective. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view him as little more than a drudge within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has proved himself to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Clash Over System & Philosophy

For example, it was the director , after having been part of the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in trying to persuade Amorim to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps such directives carry more weight when issued from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree of Jason Wilcox, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to outline his thought processes to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked why Amorim is departing with a full payout, without any penalty clause in place. The director seldom speaks publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals in football – men like him – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely all we would hear is a series of high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not equivalent to being prepared to receive.

The Supreme Authority In Command

Naturally, in training our focus on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his desire for a four-man defense. According to reports, the owner has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace data science and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style of play “shall be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is an expert in these intricate football matters, drawing from his background in petrochemicals and sailing. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the wealthy are superior: more insightful, sagacious, strategically brilliant, simply better. Whom else could one trust to manage an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that appears similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Football Order: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to join an organization and implement their plan through to completion. Yet how many businesses have such individuals established? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Better by far to place genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to determine the strategy by the directors and hire someone who will adapt their methods to suit. If managers were once chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not really creating the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the public face of an organisation they have minimal power to change. Enzo Maresca leads a team of literal children into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined while those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

A Neoliberal Football: Accountability Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism at work: the elevation of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose decisions are always sacrosanct, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without explanation. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss him for using excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and then discard them for requiring excessive time. And most importantly show gratitude; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for your new player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.