🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he convinced to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and needed putting in their place. And the figure he again turned to after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

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

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was given over to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Based on comments he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He'll see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For a person who prizes decorum and places great store in business being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was another example of how unusual things have grown at the club.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The remote leader, 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 does not attend team AGMs, dispatching his offspring, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to support the club with private missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he stepped down, but reviewing his criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to get such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of all of the things that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why was the manager not removed?

He has charged him of distorting things in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Once More'

To return to better times, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

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

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the fans became a affectionate relationship once more.

There was always - always - going to be a point when his ambition clashed with the club's operational approach, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. He publicly commented about the slow process Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently 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 agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it to date, with one already having departed - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a controversy about a internal disunity inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly came from a insider associated with the club. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his exit, that was the tone of the story.

Supporters were enraged. They then saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not back his plans to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to harm him, which it accomplished. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was losing the backing of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes