🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes following the club released the announcement of their manager's shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

In an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he convinced to come to the club when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and required being back in a box. And the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of his critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Based on things he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to get another job. He'll view this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' development was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For a person who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, this was another example of how abnormal things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to support the organization with confidential messages to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's exactly what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his invective, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to get such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of distorting information in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He claims Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the management and the directors. A portion of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

To return to better days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who took the heat when Rodgers' comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Gradually, Rodgers employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the fans became a love-in once more.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when his ambition came in contact with Celtic's business model, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the situation as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the organization spent record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and nearly reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his way out, that was the implication of the story.

Supporters were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his directors wouldn't support his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be removed. If there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes