🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond savaged his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. And the figure he again turned to after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after much of his recent life was given over to an continuous series of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering things he has said recently, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He will see this role as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - however strange as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner Desmond wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of others," stated he.

For somebody who prizes propriety and sets high importance in business being done with discretion, if not outright secrecy, here was a further example of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's most powerful figure, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not attend club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with private messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in public.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, carefully, one must question why he permit it to get this far down the line?

If Rodgers is culpable of every one of the things that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to inquire why was the manager not dismissed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting information in public that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile environment around the team and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary charge, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we discuss.

His Ambition Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers respected Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was Desmond who took the heat when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had his support. Gradually, Rodgers employed the charm, achieved the wins and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when his goals clashed with the club's operational approach, though.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the endless waiting for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the need for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the club spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well to date, with Idah already having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a report in a publication that purportedly originated from a source close to the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He didn't want to be present and he was engineering his way out, this was the implication of the article.

The fans were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his board members wouldn't support his vision to bring success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes