🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

In 551-words, key investor Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

This individual he persuaded to come to the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the figure he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of his critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering things he has said lately, he has been eager to get a new position. He'll see this role as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant shocking development was the harsh manner the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

It was a forceful attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, this was another example of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the organization's dominant figure, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the power to take all the major decisions he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not attend club AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, instead. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the organization with private messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on Monday.

The directive from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why he allow it to get this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the coach not dismissed?

He has accused him of distorting information in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the team and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the board. A portion of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and improper."

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

His Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Again

Looking back to better days, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

It was the figure who drew the heat when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened again, with bells on, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be secured, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the club splurged record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the £9m another player and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources 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 comments at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider associated with the club. It claimed that the manager was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were enraged. They then saw him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not back his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes