🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following the club issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

In 551-words, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

This individual he convinced to come to the team when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and needed putting back in a box. Plus the figure he once more relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Considering things he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure a new position. He will view this one as the perfect opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - however strange as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote he.

For a person who values propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, this was a further illustration of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the organization's dominant figure, operates in the background. The remote leader, the one with the power to take all the major decisions he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He never participate in team AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the organization with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And it's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on the manager on Monday.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, carefully, one must question why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

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

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

He claims Rodgers' words "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary charge, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Model Once More'

Looking back to better times, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers praised Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

This 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 some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had his support. Gradually, Rodgers employed the charm, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the supporters turned into a love-in again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his ambition clashed with Celtic's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened again, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he spoke about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having departed - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It looked like he was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

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

Supporters were enraged. They then viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not back his vision to bring success.

The leak was damaging, of course, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be removed. If there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the backing of the individuals above him.

The frequent {gripes