🔗 Share this article

Turns out he endured losing against lower-league opposition. Survive an important European final versus a particularly poor Spurs sides for many years. He could survive losing at home to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising academy products, a poor winning percentage, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to engage. You come at Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and appears to have missed. Even the most casual observer will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed his squad for losing individual battles succumbing when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of a England's top division's most feared sporting directors.

And frankly, this whole painful saga appears to portray the director in a whole new light. It may have been tempting, based on his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to view him as merely a functionary within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due as much to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless a previous executive earlier, he has proved himself to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which United’s competitors are now justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Conflict Regarding Formation and Philosophy

For example, it was Jason Wilcox who being involved in the hierarchy that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince him to abandon his favored formation. Naturally, these pleas met a certain resistance. However, these judgements carry more weight when issued by a man with the impeccable soccer background of Jason Wilcox, holder of international appearances and a contributor to a title-winning side decades past.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to outline his reasoning to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not equivalent to being ready to comprehend it.

The Supreme Power 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, merely executing the directives of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, the owner has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for the club to adopt analytics and analytics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he declared that the team's approach to football “shall be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, leveraging his background in industry and yachting. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are superior: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally better. Whom else would you trust to manage a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the building of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of a new striker?

The Modern Football Hierarchy: Executives Over Managers

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. Historically, clubs foolishly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, visionary coach with ideas and drive to join a club and see their vision through to completion. Yet how many businesses have such individuals set up? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to determine the strategy in the boardroom and hire a coach who will adapt their offering accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they have become more like Deliveroo drivers: not creating the food, but still ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or leaks out of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role is increasingly not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into Europe and wins domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy finds his standing damaged whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Few

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance at work: the rise of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose errors can always be sacked away without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss them for using too much 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and later discard them for requiring too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.