Amorim's Fatal Error? Taking On Wilcox and the Infallible Executive Class

Itranspired Ruben Amorim could survive a loss to lower-league opposition. He weathered an important continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Spurs sides in living memory. He could survive losing at home to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to some of the club’s best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to engage. If you challenge the sporting director, and you best not miss.

In truth, this entire bruising episode appears to portray the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, based on his nine months of experience with the Saints, to view him as little more than a functionary within the club's structure: an individual whose appointment was due largely to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect that United’s mid-table rivals will now be rightly wary.

A Strategic Clash Over Formation & Ideology

For example, this was Jason Wilcox who having been part of the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist the coach in the first place, was instrumental in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when issued from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable soccer background he possesses, holder of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually he might agree to outline his reasoning to the rest of us. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, with no compensation reduction clause activated. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely in public, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – men like Jason Wilcox – 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 prepared to comprehend it.

An Ultimate Authority Behind Command

But of course, in training our focus on Jason Wilcox we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, the owner has also proposed playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to adopt data science and analytics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he declared that United’s style of play “will be determined in this room”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, leveraging his background in industry and sailing. Above all he remains immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the wealthy are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, simply better. Who else could one trust to manage a strategic plan of austerity, the building of a modern arena that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the signing of Benjamin Sesko?

A New Football Order: Executives Above Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent at the elite levels football. Historically, clubs foolishly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, visionary coach with a philosophy and energy to go into a club and see their vision through to completion. Yet how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Far preferable to place genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the strategy by the directors and hire someone who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they have become more akin to delivery personnel: not really creating the food, yet ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the public face of an organisation they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who hired him continue to make errors indefinitely.

A Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism in action: the elevation of a privileged elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always sacrosanct, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss them for using too much that system. Hire the project manager and later bin them for taking excessive time. And most importantly show gratitude; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.