🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to come to the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting in their place. And the man he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was dedicated to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has expressed recently, he has been keen to get a new position. He will view this one as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he enjoyed such success 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 balm for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the most significant shocking development was the brutal manner the shareholder described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote Desmond.

For a person who prizes propriety and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's dominant figure, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the major decisions he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not attend team AGMs, sending his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but no statement is heard in public.

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

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

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

Desmond has charged him of distorting information in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims his statements "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary allegation, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Again

Looking back to better days, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected him and, really, to no one other.

This was Desmond who drew the heat when his returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Gradually, the manager employed the charm, delivered the wins and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for targets to be secured, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Despite the club spent record amounts of money in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having left - Rodgers demanded more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

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

A few months back there was a report in a publication that purportedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He desired not to be present and he was arranging his way out, that was the implication of the story.

The fans were enraged. They now saw him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not back his plans to bring triumph.

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

At that point it was plain the manager was losing the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes