🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the announcement of their manager's shock resignation via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

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

This individual he persuaded to come to the club when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. Plus the man he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated 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 manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Based on things he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure a new position. He'll view this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

It was a forceful attempt at character assassination, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For a person who values propriety and sets high importance in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's most powerful presence, moves in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to take all the major decisions he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club AGMs, sending his son, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the organization with private missives to news outlets, but no statement is made in public.

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

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his criticism, carefully, one must question why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why was the manager not removed?

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

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled hostility towards members of the management and the board. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was Desmond who took the heat when his returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had his support. Gradually, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals came in contact with the club's operational approach, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team went about their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he termed "flexibility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the club spent record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having departed - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent media briefing he would typically minimize it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a source close to the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was engineering his exit, this was the tone of the article.

Supporters were enraged. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his board members wouldn't back his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was losing the backing of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes