🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear he was able to withstand losing against Grimsby. He weathered losing a crucial European final against one of the worst Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling his team the worst the club has ever seen. But there was a single opponent with whom the Portuguese coach 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 1994-95 season, the coach took on Jason Wilcox and appears to have missed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a manager who often railed his squad for losing individual battles crumbling when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of one of England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

In truth, this entire painful saga seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. It may have been easy, based on his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due as much to his close relationship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outsmarting the club's celebrated head coach, just as he bested the hapless a previous executive before him, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among football's strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which the club's competitors are now rightly wary.

A Strategic Clash Over Formation and Philosophy

For example, this was the director who having been part of the leadership that appointed the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim originally, was instrumental in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties faced pushback. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when delivered from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he may be persuaded to explain his thought processes publicly. Maybe one day questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, with no compensation reduction clause in place. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals in football – individuals such as him – function at a level exceeding our prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, probably we would perceive is a series of high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite equivalent to being prepared to receive.

An Supreme Authority Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has emphasized his preference for a back four. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward as a right wing-back. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace data science and analytics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style to football “will be determined by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical footballing stuff, leveraging his previous experience in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he is incredibly rich, and as we all know, the rich are superior: more insightful, sagacious, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Who else could one trust to manage an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that looks a lot like an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

A New Football Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing at the elite levels of the game. For decades, clubs foolishly delegated big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to go into a club and implement their plan through to completion. But how many companies have such individuals set up? What number of mass redundancies have they overseen? Better by far to invest the real power where it belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the tactics in the boardroom and hire a coach who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were once chefs, they have become more like delivery personnel: not really creating the food, but still finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or leaks out of the box.

Nowadays, their job is increasingly less about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face of an organisation they can do little to influence. Enzo Maresca takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and essentially gets sacked for speaking out. A manager at Celtic finds his standing damaged while those individuals who hired him live to blunder another day.

A Modern Corporate Game: Accountability for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this is simply corporate governance in action: the elevation of a gilded overclass who can never be wrong, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach only to fire him for playing too much that system. Hire the process guy and later discard him for taking excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.