Manchester United CEO Omar Berrada isn’t mincing words about why Ruben Amorim got fired in January 2026. In a candid interview with The Athletic, Berrada said the Portuguese coach basically painted himself into a corner with his tactical stubbornness. That’s a pretty direct read from a guy who usually keeps his public comments buttoned up.
Amorim lasted 14 months at Old Trafford. He came in from Sporting CP in November 2024 with a clear plan to run a 3-4-3 system built on positional play. It didn’t work. United finished 15th in the Premier League in 2024-25 and lost the Europa League final. By January, the board had seen enough. Amorim has since landed at AC Milan, which means United’s preseason friendly in August just got a lot more interesting.
Berrada’s language matters here. He said Amorim effectively cornered himself, which puts the blame on the coach rather than the club’s hiring decision or the roster he inherited. It’s a careful way to say the appointment wasn’t a mistake overall but the guy in charge refused to adapt. Berrada also gave Amorim credit for raising standards in the dressing room and at Carrington, so it’s not all bad. But the message is clear: you gotta bend sometimes or you break.
The evidence behind the critique
Reports from inside the club back up Berrada’s claim. Amorim stuck with his back three even when injuries and the squad makeup made it a terrible fit. United’s analysts pushed him to switch to a four-man backline more often during high-pressure games. He didn’t budge. According to ESPN, sources described the firing as a decision driven by not enough evolution or progress on the pitch. The club gave him time and structural support but the results didn’t improve.
It wasn’t just tactics either. The Manchester Evening News reported a growing power struggle between Amorim and sporting director Jason Wilcox over who controls recruitment and how much the team should adapt to specific opponents. Amorim kept insisting he was a manager, not just a head coach, which rubbed the hierarchy the wrong way. Training ground staff noticed United’s patterns became predictable and easy for opponents to scout. That’s a brutal operational verdict no matter how good the philosophy looks on paper.
What this means for Milan and for United
Amorim walks into AC Milan with the same adaptability question hanging over his head. Milan has its own internal politics and roster problems. His positional principles are still respected across Europe, but whether he can adjust when Plan A isn’t working will define his time there.
For United, Berrada’s frankness serves another purpose: it sets the narrative around Michael Carrick’s appointment. Carrick has kept pieces of Amorim’s positional framework but runs a more flexible 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3. The club has briefed that adaptation, not the ideas themselves, was the real problem. That distinction matters especially now that United stopped paying compensation to Amorim after he took the Milan job.
Whether Amorim proves he can adjust at the San Siro or the same issues follow him remains to be seen. One thing is already clear though. Berrada’s public honesty isn’t a one-off. It’s becoming a pattern under INEOS’s leadership, and it’s a refreshing if brutal change from the usual corporate nonsense.
Leave a Comment