🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear he could survive defeat by Grimsby. Survive a decisive continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive losing at home to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling his team the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was a single opponent against whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to engage. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, similar to numerous top-flight right-back in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated at his players for failing in individual battles crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and animal charisma of a the Premier League’s most feared football executives.

And frankly, this entire painful saga seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a different perspective. It may have been easy, based on his nine months in a similar role with the Saints, to view him as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate a previous executive before him, he has demonstrated as one of football's true generals: a tactical intellect that United’s competitors will now be rightly wary.

A Strategic Conflict Regarding System and Ideology

For example, this was Jason Wilcox , after being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, was instrumental in trying to persuade Amorim to ditch his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these pleas faced pushback. However, such directives carry more weight when issued by a man with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, with no compensation reduction clause in place. The director speaks rarely in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as him – simply operate on a plane exceeding our mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite the same as being ready to comprehend it.

An Ultimate Power Behind Command

Naturally, in training our focus on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his ultimate superior the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his preference for a back four. It is reported, the owner has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace data science and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he announced that the team's approach of play “will be decided by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his previous experience in industry and sailing. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, sagacious, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Who else would you trust to oversee an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that appears similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of a new striker?

The New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Managers

This represents a shift that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted major sporting choices to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously possible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to join a club and implement their plan supported to fruition. But how many companies have these guys established? What number of large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the tactics by the directors and appoint a coach who can tailor their methods to suit. If managers were formerly chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not responsible for the product, but still finally accountable if it arrives cold or fails of the box.

Nowadays, their job is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into Europe and wins domestic cups, and essentially is dismissed for talking. Wilfried Nancy sees his reputation ruined whereas the people who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

A Modern Corporate Football: Accountability for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this represents corporate governance at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without justification. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then fire them for using too much 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and then discard them for taking excessive time. And above all show gratitude; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.