🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the announcement of their manager's surprising departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious anger.

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

The man he persuaded to join the club when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. Plus the man he again relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

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

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

For now - and perhaps for a time. Considering comments he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to get another job. He will see this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant shocking development was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-preservation at the expense of others," stated Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and places great store in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, this was another example of how abnormal situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the club's dominant presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to take all the major calls he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He never participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the organization with confidential missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

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

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reading Desmond's criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why he allow it to reach such a critical point?

If the manager is culpable of all of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why had been the coach not removed?

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

He says Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a toxic environment around the club and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the board. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with Celtic's Model Again

Looking back to better days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the fans became a love-in once more.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when Rodgers' ambition clashed with Celtic's business model, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. He publicly commented about the sluggish way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - Rodgers demanded more and more and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity inside the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would typically minimize it and nearly reverse what he said.

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

A few months back there was a report in a publication that allegedly originated from a source close to the club. It claimed that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

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

Supporters were angered. They now saw him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not support his vision to achieve triumph.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was clear Rodgers was losing the backing of the people above him.

The regular {gripes