United's flawed process meant Amorim was always doomed

Data is a less certain guide when recruiting coaches but it can still provide answers to some fundamental questions

- Rob Draper

When Manchester United embarked upon this season full of fresh hope and optimism, there was an unexpected note of caution from one of the best executives in the game. “It’s clear they don’t have a process,” the executive said of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s new regime early in the season.

It was a stark pronouncement at odds with the consensus that Ruben Amorim, with a proper preseason to bed in his tactical system and exciting signings, would be able to demonstrate his considerable abilities unencumbered by the hospital pass he had been given on his appointment in November 2024.

And yet it was United’s recruitment of Amorim that led this experienced hand to doubt the direction of United under Ratcliffe. Despite all the rhetoric after the Glazer handover of executive power, it was clear to some that United were embarking on the same institutional failures of the past in their choice of manager.

Ratcliffe was audibly excited on appointing Amorim, according to one insider, and the chief executive, Omar Berrada, who had driven the recruitment, and director of football, Jason Wilcox, shared his confidence, though there was a prescient cautionary note from Dan Ashworth, then the sporting director, who would depart a month later in the fallout.

Though United say everyone was behind the Amorim appointment once it was made, Ashworth was initially a dissenting voice, warning that United needed to rebuild the squad and infrastructure over a number of years and that a safer appointment was preferable. Crucially, he pointed out, they didn’t have the squad to play 3-4-3. Ashworth’s scepticism was shared among analysts at rival clubs.

Tottenham and Liverpool had assessed Amorim as replacements for Antonio Conte and Jürgen Klopp and passed. Now it looks as though Ashworth was sacked for declaring the emperor naked.