🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he convinced to join the club when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. Plus the figure he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of his critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an continuous circuit of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Based on comments he has said recently, O'Neill has been keen to secure a new position. He'll view this role as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the moment.

All-out Effort at Reputation Destruction'

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

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

For somebody who prizes propriety and sets high importance in dealings being done with discretion, if not outright secrecy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal things have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's dominant figure, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the power to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He never attend team AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the club with confidential missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in public.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to remain. And it's exactly what he went against when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he allow it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the manager not removed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting information in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He says his words "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team 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 unjustified and improper."

Such an extraordinary allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

His Ambition Clashed with the Club's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, really, to nobody else.

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

This marked the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, Rodgers turned on the charm, achieved the wins and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals clashed with the club's business model, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the interminable waiting for targets to be secured, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he called "agility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the organization spent unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - the manager demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would typically minimize it and nearly contradict what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like he was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly came from a source close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He desired not to be there and he was engineering his way out, this was the tone of the story.

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not support his vision to bring triumph.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals above him.

The frequent {gripes