🔗 Share this article

Itbecame clear Ruben Amorim was able to withstand a loss to Grimsby. Survive losing a crucial European final versus a particularly poor Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive losing at home to West Ham and Wolves, finishing 15th, the tactical inflexibility, laying waste to some of the club’s most promising academy products, the 32% win rate, labeling the squad the poorest the club has ever seen. Yet, there existed one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to engage. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a Premiership right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship campaign, Amorim took on the executive and seems to have failed. Even the most distracted of readers can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who frequently berated his squad for failing in individual battles crumbling when confronted by the intense pressure and formidable presence of one of the Premier League’s most feared football executives.

In truth, this entire bruising episode appears to portray the director in a whole new light. It may have been easy, given his brief stint in a similar role with the Saints, to regard him as merely a drudge within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due as much to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outsmarting United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the hapless Dan Ashworth earlier, he has proved himself to be among football's strategic masterminds: a tactical intellect of which United’s competitors are now rightly wary.

A Strategic Clash Regarding Formation & Ideology

For example, it was Jason Wilcox , after having been part of the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim originally, played a key role in trying to persuade Amorim to abandon his beloved formation. Unsurprisingly, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when issued by a man with 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 might agree to explain his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point questions may arise why Amorim is walking away with full compensation, without any compensation reduction clause in place. But Jason Wilcox seldom speaks in public, and with very good reason. The true intellectuals of this sport – men like him – simply operate at a level 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 receive.

The Ultimate Authority Behind Command

Naturally, in training our focus on the sporting director we overlook the real power behind the modern United throne. The director is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has emphasized his preference for a four-man defense. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace data science and metrics. Per reports, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach to football “will be determined by this group”.

After all, Sir Jim is an expert in this technical footballing stuff, leveraging his background in petrochemicals and yachting. Most importantly he remains immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the wealthy are superior: more perceptive, sagacious, more tactically astute, fundamentally superior. Who else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the building of a new stadium that appears a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

A New Soccer Order: Executives Over Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, teams mistakenly delegated big footballing decisions to subordinate staff such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Maybe previously feasible for a young, visionary coach with ideas and energy to go into an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many businesses have these guys set up? How many mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to invest genuine authority where it belongs: the executive class, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. It is wiser to decide the strategy in the boardroom and hire someone who will adapt their methods to suit. If coaches were once chefs, they have become more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the product, yet ultimately answerable should it be delivered cold or fails to meet standards.

Nowadays, their job is increasingly not about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the receptionist on the front desk, the public face for a club they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea leads a team of very young players into the Champions League and wins domestic cups, and effectively is dismissed for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy finds his reputation ruined whereas the people who hired him live to blunder another day.

A Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility for the Few

And possibly in a small way this is simply corporate governance in action: the rise of a privileged elite who are infallible, whose decisions remain untouchable, whose mistakes can always be sacked away without justification. Appoint the system coach and then fire them for playing too much 3-4-3. Hire the project manager and then discard them for taking too long. And above all be grateful; for your modest increases in ticket costs, for your new player acquisitions, for the reality that the grownups – however well qualified – remain in control.