🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following the club issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a brief five-paragraph statement, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

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

This individual he convinced to join the club when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. Plus the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has expressed lately, he has been eager to secure another job. He will view this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well make a call to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the time being.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the biggest shocking moment was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

It was a forceful endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of others," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, operates in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to make all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team annual meetings, dispatching his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And that's just what he went against when going all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why did he permit it to get this far down the line?

Assuming the manager is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the manager not removed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager lauded Desmond at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

It was the figure who took the criticism when his returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had his support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a love-in again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when his goals clashed with Celtic's operational approach, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish way the team went about their transfer business, the interminable waiting for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Despite the club splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having left - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next media briefing he would typically minimize it and almost 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.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a insider close to the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his exit, that was the implication of the story.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't back his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

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

The frequent {gripes