🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the news of their manager's shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the bombshell landed, from Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious fury.

In 551-words, key investor Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he convinced to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the figure he again relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the severity of his critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an unending circuit of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure another job. He will view this role as the perfect chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - however strange as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest shocking moment was the brutal way the shareholder described Rodgers.

It was a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a branding of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, this was a further example of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, moves in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team annual meetings, sending his son, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to support the club with private messages to media organisations, but nothing is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And it's just what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's invective, line by line, one must question why he allow it to reach this far down the line?

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why was the manager not removed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims his statements "played a part to a toxic environment around the club and encouraged animosity towards members of the management and the board. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was the figure who took the criticism when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the supporters became a love-in again.

There was always - consistently - going to be a point when Rodgers' ambition clashed with the club's business model, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with added intensity, over the last year. He publicly commented about the slow way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for targets to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he spoke about the necessity for what he called "agility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the organization spent record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it so far, with Idah since having left - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a insider close to the club. It said that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his departure plan.

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

The fans were angered. They now saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his directors did not support his vision to bring triumph.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes