🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short communication, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

In 551-words, key investor Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

The man he convinced to come to the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the man he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

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

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, 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 eager to secure a new position. He'll view this role as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal way the shareholder described Rodgers.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-preservation at the expense of others," wrote he.

For a person who prizes propriety and places great store in business being done with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, this was another illustration of how unusual situations have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He never participate in team AGMs, dispatching his son, Ross, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the organization with private missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

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

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why did he permit it to get such a critical point?

If Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why was the manager not removed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He claims his statements "have contributed to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the management and the directors. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

What an remarkable allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier days, they were close, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to nobody else.

It was the figure who took the heat when his comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had his support. Gradually, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the fans turned into a love-in once more.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' ambition came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with added intensity, recently. He publicly commented about the slow process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he called "agility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the club spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well to date, with Idah already having departed - the manager demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity inside the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly came from a insider associated with the club. It claimed that the manager was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his exit, this was the tone of the article.

The fans were enraged. They now saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his directors did not support his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was shedding the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes