🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a perfunctory short communication, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious anger.

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

The man he convinced to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and needed putting back in a box. Plus the figure he once more turned to after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was given over to an continuous series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to get another job. He'll view this role as the perfect chance, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' development was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of others," stated he.

For somebody who values decorum and sets high importance in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, here was another illustration of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

The major figure, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the important decisions he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club annual meetings, sending his son, his son, instead. He seldom, 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 occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

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

The directive from the club is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, carefully, one must question why he permit it to reach this far down the line?

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

He has charged him of spinning things in public that did not tally with the facts.

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the directors. A portion of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

His Ambition Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier times, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the heat when his comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - always - going to be a point when his goals came in contact with the club's business model, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he spoke about the need for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Despite the club splurged unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah since having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like he was engaging in a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his exit, that was the implication of the story.

The fans were enraged. They then saw him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his honor because his board members wouldn't back his plans to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was shedding the backing of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes