🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the news of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Desmond savaged his old chum.

This individual he convinced to come to the club when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. And the man he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was almost an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an continuous series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Based on comments he has expressed recently, he has been keen to secure another job. He will see this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Will he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest shocking moment was the harsh way the shareholder described Rodgers.

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

For somebody who prizes decorum and sets high importance in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was another example of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's most powerful presence, operates in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the important decisions he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

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

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers resigned, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, one must question why did he allow it to reach this far down the line?

If Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the club and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the board. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

Such an extraordinary charge, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

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

Looking back to better times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have described it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had his support. Gradually, the manager employed the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the fans became a love-in once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team went about their transfer business, the interminable delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with one already having departed - Rodgers pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the team and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly came from a insider close to the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his way out, this was the tone of the story.

The fans were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his honor because his directors did not support his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was plain the manager was shedding the support of the people above him.

The regular {gripes