🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief short statement, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

In 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to come to the club when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. Plus the man he once more relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Based on things he has expressed recently, he has been keen to secure another job. He'll see this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' development was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in business being done with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another example of how abnormal situations have become at the club.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the power to take all the major calls he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend team annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's slow to speak out.

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

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And it's just what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his invective, carefully, one must question why he allow it to reach such a critical point?

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the coach not dismissed?

He has accused him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an extraordinary allegation, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Model Again

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who took the criticism when his returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had his back. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the fans became a love-in again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals came in contact with the club's business model, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic went about their transfer business, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the need for what he called "agility" 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 costly Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity inside the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would typically minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

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

The fans were enraged. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his board members wouldn't back his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be removed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

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

The frequent {gripes