🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the news of their manager's shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

This individual he convinced to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and needed putting in their place. Plus the figure he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

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 past successes at the team, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has said recently, he has been eager to secure another job. He will view this role as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such success and praise.

Would he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal way Desmond described the former manager.

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the expense of others," stated Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have become at the club.

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to make all the important calls he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He does not attend club annual meetings, dispatching his son, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

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

The directive from the team is that he resigned, but reviewing his criticism, carefully, one must question why he allow it to get such a critical point?

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not dismissed?

He has accused him of distorting information in public that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with Celtic's Model Once More'

To return to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to no one other.

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

This marked the most controversial hiring, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when his ambition clashed with the club's business model, though.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their transfer business, the endless waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the case as far as he was concerned.

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

Even when the organization splurged record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in public.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was playing a risky strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a insider close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his directors did not support his plans to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes