🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief short communication, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he convinced to come to the club when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. Plus the man he once more relied on after the previous manager left for another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He'll view this one as the perfect chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Would he give it up 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.

All-out Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the most significant shocking development was the brutal manner the shareholder described the former manager.

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

For a person who values propriety and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not outright privacy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have grown at the club.

The major figure, the club's most powerful figure, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He never participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the club with confidential missives to news outlets, but no statement is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And it's exactly what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, line by line, one must question why he allow it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of spinning information in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his words "played a part to a toxic environment around the team and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and improper."

What an remarkable charge, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier days, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers lauded Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected him and, truly, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who drew the heat when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had his back. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals clashed with the club's operational approach, though.

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

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity within the team and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly reverse what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He desired not to be present and he was arranging his exit, this was the implication of the article.

Supporters were enraged. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his board members did not back his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes