🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear the manager endured defeat by lower-league opposition. Survive an important European final versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, an unwavering system, squandering some of the club’s most promising academy products, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was a single opponent with whom Ruben Amorim was not permitted to dance. You come at the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a Premiership defender during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning campaign, Amorim came at the executive and seems to have failed. The most distracted of readers will notice the paradoxical situation: a coach who often railed his squad for losing individual battles crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and animal charisma of one of England's top division's most feared sporting directors.

And frankly, this whole bruising episode appears to portray the director in a different perspective. It may have been easy, based on his nine months of experience with the Saints, to regard him as merely a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position largely to his close relationship with ex-colleague a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How wrong we all were. By masterfully outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has proved himself as one of football's true generals: a strategic mind that United’s competitors are now rightly wary.

The Strategic Clash Regarding Formation and Ideology

For example, it was the director , after being involved in the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, was instrumental in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when issued from the mouth of a man the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of international appearances and a contributor to a title-winning side decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Maybe one day questions may arise why Amorim is walking away with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause activated. The director speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like him – simply operate on a plane beyond our own prosaic understanding. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being prepared to receive.

The Supreme Authority In Command

But of course, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has made very clear his desire for a back four. It is reported, the owner has also proposed deploying the forward as a right wing-back. The owner is eager for the club to embrace analytics and analytics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting soon after his investment, he announced that United’s style of play “will be decided in this room”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is an expert in this technical footballing stuff, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he remains immensely wealthy, and it is known, the wealthy are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, fundamentally better. Who else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of austerity, the building of a new stadium that looks similar to an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

The New Football Order: Executives Above Managers

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing in top-tier of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, scouts – even footballers. Perhaps it was once feasible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and energy to join an organization and implement their plan supported to fruition. But how many businesses have such individuals established? How many mass redundancies have they overseen? Far preferable to place the real power where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the tactics by the directors and appoint someone who will adapt their offering accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not creating the food, but still finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, their job has become less about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the receptionist of the operation, the visible figurehead for a club they can do little to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and secures two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who hired him continue to make errors another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Accountability Only for the Coaches

And possibly in a small way this represents neoliberalism at work: the elevation of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose choices remain untouchable, whose errors can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss him for playing too much that system. Hire the process guy and then bin him for requiring excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest summer signings, for the fact that the adults – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.