🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a brief five-paragraph communication, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he persuaded to join the club when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and needed putting back in a box. Plus the figure he again turned to after the previous manager departed to another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Considering comments he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He'll see this one as the perfect opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being done with discretion, if not complete privacy, here was a further illustration of how unusual situations have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the authority to make all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not attend club annual meetings, dispatching his son, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the organization with private messages to news outlets, but no statement is heard in the open.

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

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, one must question why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If Rodgers is guilty of all of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to inquire why was the coach not removed?

Desmond has charged him of spinning information in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards members of the management and the directors. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Again

Looking back to better times, they were close, the two men. The manager praised Desmond at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to him and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who drew the heat when his comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the fans became a love-in again.

There was always - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals came in contact with Celtic's business model, though.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow process the team went about their transfer business, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Despite the organization splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with one already having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like he was engaging in a risky strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a source associated with the club. It said that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his way out, this was the tone of the story.

The fans were enraged. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his vision to achieve triumph.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it accomplished. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes