🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

The man he convinced to come to the club when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss 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 continuous circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He'll view this role as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well make a call to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not outright privacy, this was a further illustration of how abnormal situations have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to take all the major calls he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his son, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the club with confidential messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And it's exactly what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the team is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, you have to wonder why he permit it to get such a critical point?

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

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

He claims Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards members of the management and the board. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

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

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

Looking back to better days, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, really, to no one other.

It was Desmond who took the criticism when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, delivered the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

There was always - consistently - going to be a moment when his ambition clashed with Celtic's operational approach, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for prospects 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 need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the club splurged record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it to date, with one since having departed - the manager demanded more and more and, oftentimes, he did it 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 media briefing he would typically minimize it and nearly contradict what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a publication that purportedly came from a source associated with the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

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

The fans were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not back his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was losing the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes