🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear he was able to withstand a loss to Grimsby. Survive an important European final versus one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, undermining some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest in Manchester United history. But there was a single opponent against whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to tango. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on the executive and seems to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who often railed at his players for losing one-on-one duels crumbling in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of a England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

And frankly, this entire painful saga appears to portray the director in a different perspective. It may have been tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to regard him as little more than a drudge 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 wrong we all were. By masterfully outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has proved himself to be among the sport’s true generals: a strategic mind of which the club's mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Clash Regarding System & Ideology

To illustrate, it was Jason Wilcox who 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 beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. However, these judgements hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side decades past.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to explain his thought processes to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, with no penalty clause activated. The director seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – function on a plane exceeding our prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not the same as being ready to comprehend it.

The Ultimate Authority Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has emphasized his preference for a back four. According to reports, the owner has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for the club to adopt analytics and metrics. According to ESPN, in an executive meeting early in his minority ownership, he declared 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 petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are superior: more insightful, more wise, strategically brilliant, fundamentally superior. Whom else could one trust to manage an enlightened programme of austerity, the construction of a modern arena that looks similar to an abstract design, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A New Football Order: Directors Above Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted major sporting choices to subordinate staff such as coaches, scouts – players themselves. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with ideas and drive to join a club and see their vision supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of large-scale layoffs have they overseen? Far preferable to place the real power where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. Better by far to decide the strategy in the boardroom and hire a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If managers were once chefs, they are now more like Deliveroo drivers: not responsible for the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, their job has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of literal children into Europe and secures domestic cups, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy finds his standing damaged whereas those individuals who hired him live to blunder indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Responsibility Only for the Few

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance in action: the rise of a privileged elite who are infallible, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose errors can invariably be sacked away without justification. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss him for playing excessively 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and then discard them for taking excessive time. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – are in charge.