🔗 Share this article

Tbecame clear Ruben Amorim endured losing against Grimsby. Survive losing a crucial European final against one of the worst Tottenham teams in living memory. He could survive home defeats against domestic rivals, a lowly league position, an unwavering system, squandering some of the club’s most promising academy products, the 32% win rate, calling his team the poorest the club has ever seen. But there was a single opponent against whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Regrettably, similar to numerous top-flight defender in Blackburn’s title-winning campaign, Amorim came at Jason Wilcox and appears 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 when confronted by the white heat and formidable presence of a England's top division's most intimidating sporting directors.

And frankly, this entire painful saga appears to portray the director in a different perspective. It may have been easy, based on his brief stint of experience at Southampton, to view him as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position as much to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted head coach, just as he bested the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has demonstrated as one of football's strategic masterminds: a strategic mind of which the club's mid-table rivals will now be rightly wary.

The Tactical Conflict Regarding System and Philosophy

For example, it was the director , after being involved in the leadership that hired the 3-4-3 fundamentalist Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince him to abandon his beloved 3-4-3. Unsurprisingly, these pleas faced pushback. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when delivered by a man with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, holder of international appearances and a contributor to a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually he may be persuaded to explain his reasoning to the rest of us. Maybe one day he might be asked why Amorim is walking away with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as him – function at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive is a series of ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite the same as being prepared to receive.

The Supreme Power Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on the sporting director we are obscuring the real power behind the modern United throne. The director is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his superior Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who privately has made very clear his desire for a back four. According to reports, Ratcliffe has also suggested deploying the forward in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for United to embrace analytics and analytics. Per reports, in an executive meeting early in his minority ownership, he declared that the team's approach of play “will be determined by this group”.

Ultimately, Ratcliffe is an expert in this technical football matters, drawing from his background in industry and sailing. Above all he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are superior: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, fundamentally better. Whom else would you trust to manage a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the building of a new stadium that looks a lot like an abstract design, the signing of a new striker?

A Modern Football Hierarchy: Directors Above Managers

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing at the elite levels football. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for an up-and-coming, innovative manager with a philosophy and drive to join an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. But how many businesses have these guys established? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Better by far to place genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the casually dressed executives, the individuals with impressive professional resumes. Better by far to decide the strategy by the directors and appoint a coach who can tailor their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not really responsible for the food, yet ultimately answerable should it be delivered poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the receptionist on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of literal children into the Champions League and wins two medium-sized trophies, and essentially gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic sees his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who hired him continue to make errors another day.

The Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility for the Few

And possibly on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism at work: the elevation of a gilded overclass who are infallible, whose choices remain untouchable, whose errors can always be sacked away without explanation. Hire the 3-4-3 coach only to dismiss them for playing excessively that system. Bring in the project manager and later discard him for requiring excessive time. And above all be grateful; for your modest season ticket price rises, for the latest player acquisitions, for the reality that the adults – however well qualified – are in charge.