🔗 Share this article

Iturns out he could survive losing against lower-league opposition. He weathered an important continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive home defeats to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, laying waste to the team's best academy products, the 32% win rate, calling the squad the worst the club has ever seen. Yet, there existed a single opponent with whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to dance. You come at Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, similar to numerous Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim came at Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. Even the most distracted of readers will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated at his players for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing in the face of the white heat and formidable presence of a the Premier League’s most feared sporting directors.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. It may have been tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: a man whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with ex-colleague Omar Berrada rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated as one of the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that the club's competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Conflict Regarding System and Ideology

For example, this was Jason Wilcox , 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 him to ditch his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when issued by a man with the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to explain his reasoning publicly. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is walking away with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as him – function at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, most likely all we would hear would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not equivalent to being prepared to receive.

An Ultimate Authority Behind the Throne

Naturally, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we are obscuring the real power behind the modern United throne. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his ultimate line manager the billionaire owner, who privately has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to adopt analytics and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit early in his investment, he declared that the team's approach to football “shall be decided in this room”.

After all, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply superior. Whom else would you trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that appears a lot like someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier of the game. Historically, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, scouts – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, visionary coach with ideas and energy to join a club and see their vision through to completion. But how many businesses have these guys established? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to invest the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to decide the strategy by the directors and hire a coach who can tailor their offering to suit. If coaches were once chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the product, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, a coach's role is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the visible figurehead for a club they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into Europe and wins two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance in action: the rise of a gilded elite who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Hire the system coach and then fire them for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and later bin him for requiring too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.