🔗 Share this article

Iturns out he could survive defeat by lower-league opposition. Survive an important continental showpiece versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive home defeats against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, the tactical inflexibility, undermining some of the club’s best academy products, the 32% win rate, labeling his team the poorest the club has ever seen. But there was one adversary with whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to tango. You come at Jason Wilcox, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and seems to have failed. The most casual observer will notice the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated at his players for failing in individual battles succumbing in the face of the white heat and formidable presence of one of the Premier League’s most feared football executives.

In truth, this entire painful saga seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to regard him as merely a drudge in the United exoskeleton: an individual whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive as any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring the club's celebrated manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, Jason Wilcox has proved himself to be among football's strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect that United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

A Strategic Conflict Regarding Formation and Ideology

For example, this was Jason Wilcox , after having been part of the leadership that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim originally, played a key role in trying to persuade him to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas were resisted. But perhaps such directives carry more weight when delivered from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a role in a championship team from 31 years ago.

Maybe eventually he may be persuaded to explain his reasoning to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point questions may arise regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, with no penalty clause in place. But Jason Wilcox speaks rarely publicly, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals in football – men like him – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not equivalent to being ready to receive.

An Ultimate Power Behind Command

Naturally, in training our focus on Jason Wilcox we overlook the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, the owner has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to adopt analytics and metrics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style to football “will be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in this technical footballing stuff, leveraging his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he is incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, 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 acquisition of a new striker?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Over Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated major sporting choices to low-level employees like managers, talent spotters – even footballers. Maybe previously feasible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with ideas and energy to join a club and see their vision supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have these guys established? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to determine the tactics in the boardroom and appoint someone who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not responsible for the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or fails to meet standards.

Nowadays, a coach's role has become not about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to change. Enzo Maresca leads a team of literal children into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who appointed him continue to make errors indefinitely.

The Modern Corporate Game: Accountability for the Few

And perhaps in a small way this represents neoliberalism in action: the elevation of a privileged elite who are infallible, whose decisions are always untouchable, whose errors can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Appoint the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss them for using excessively 3-4-3. Hire the process guy and then discard him for taking excessive time. And above all show gratitude; for your modest season ticket price rises, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.