🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the club when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and needed putting in their place. Plus the figure he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after much of his latter years was given over to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Based on things he has expressed recently, he has been keen to secure a new position. He will view this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

It was a forceful endeavor at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of others," wrote he.

For a person who values propriety and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not complete privacy, here was a further example of how abnormal situations have become at the club.

The major figure, the club's dominant presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the important calls he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He never participate in team AGMs, sending his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to support the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but no statement is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And that's exactly what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the team is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he allow it to get such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not removed?

Desmond has accused him of spinning things in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He claims his statements "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Model Once More'

To return to happier days, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals clashed with Celtic's business model, however.

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent media briefing he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like he was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly originated from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his honor because his directors did not support his vision to bring triumph.

The leak was damaging, of course, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes