🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear the manager was able to withstand defeat by Grimsby. He weathered an important continental showpiece against a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He withstood home defeats to West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to some of the club’s best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed one adversary against whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to engage. You come at the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship campaign, the coach took on the executive and appears to have failed. Even the most casual observer can see the irony here: a coach who frequently berated his squad for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing when confronted by the intense pressure and animal charisma of one of 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 tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to view him as little more than a drudge within the club's structure: a man who owed his position as much to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How wrong we all were. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has demonstrated to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that United’s mid-table rivals will now be justifiably concerned.

The Strategic Clash Regarding Formation and Ideology

To illustrate, this was the director , after being involved in the hierarchy that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach originally, played a key role in attempting to convince him to ditch his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these entreaties met a certain resistance. However, these judgements carry more weight when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a contributor to a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox may be persuaded to explain his thought processes to the rest of us. Maybe one day he might be asked regarding why the coach is walking away with a full payout, without any penalty clause in place. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as him – function at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear is a series of high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Wanting is not the same as being ready to comprehend it.

An Supreme Power In the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate superior 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. Ratcliffe is keen for United to embrace data science 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 in this room”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is a specialist in this technical football matters, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Above all he remains immensely wealthy, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, simply superior. Who else would you trust to manage a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a new stadium that looks similar to someone’s leftover knitting, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Above Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to subordinate staff like managers, scouts – players themselves. Perhaps it was once feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with ideas and energy to join an organization and implement their plan supported to fruition. But how many businesses have such individuals set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Better by far to place genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to decide the strategy in the boardroom and hire a coach who can tailor their offering to suit. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really creating the product, yet finally accountable should it be delivered cold or fails to meet standards.

Nowadays, their job has become less about defining the vision and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the visible figurehead for a club they can do little to change. Enzo Maresca takes a squad of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. Wilfried Nancy sees his standing damaged whereas those individuals who appointed him live to blunder another day.

A Modern Corporate Game: Accountability Only for the Coaches

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents corporate governance in action: the rise of a gilded elite who are infallible, whose choices remain sacrosanct, whose mistakes can invariably be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the system coach and then fire him for playing too much 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and later bin him for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for the incremental season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.