🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, courtesy of the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

In 551-words, key investor Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he convinced to join the club when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being back in a box. And the man he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has said lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He will see this one as the perfect opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Will he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well make a call to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

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

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a branding of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," wrote he.

For a person who values decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further example of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the organization with confidential missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's exactly what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he resigned, but reading his criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why had been the coach not removed?

He has accused him of distorting things in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled 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 unjustified and improper."

Such an extraordinary allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with Celtic's Model Again

To return to better days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded Desmond at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the heat when Rodgers' comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Over time, the manager employed the charm, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, 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 stated about the necessity for what he called "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with one already having left - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would usually minimize it and nearly reverse what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a source associated with the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his way out, that was the implication of the article.

Supporters were angered. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his vision to achieve success.

The leak was damaging, of course, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was shedding the backing of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes