🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

This individual he persuaded to join the club when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and required being in their place. And the man he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Based on things he has said recently, O'Neill has been eager to secure a new position. He will view this role as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Will he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. The club might well reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

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

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a branding of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote he.

For a person who prizes propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not outright secrecy, this was another example of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's most powerful presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to make all the important decisions he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend team AGMs, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an rare moment to support the club with confidential missives to media organisations, but nothing is made in public.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to be. And that's just what he went against when going full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

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

Assuming the manager is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the coach not removed?

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

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the management and the directors. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Model Again

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Gradually, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the fans became a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with added intensity, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the club splurged unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a bomb about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly originated from a insider close to the club. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his exit, that was the implication of the article.

The fans were enraged. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his board members did not support his plans to bring success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be removed. Whether there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was losing the support of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes