🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after Celtic released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a brief five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

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

The man he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. Plus the figure he once more turned to after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

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

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Considering things he has expressed lately, he has been eager to secure a new position. He'll see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Would he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the cost of others," stated he.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further example of how unusual situations have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's most powerful figure, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the major decisions he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He never attend club annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the organization with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And it's exactly what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on Monday.

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

Assuming the manager is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the coach not removed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile environment around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we discuss.

His Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to better days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the heat when his comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the return 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 lurch for another club.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, the manager employed the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the fans became a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals clashed with Celtic's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the necessity for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the club spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with one since having left - Rodgers pushed for more and more and, often, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent media briefing he would typically minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

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

A few months back there was a report in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his exit, that was the tone of the story.

The fans were enraged. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an investigation and for the guilty person to be removed. If there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

By then it was plain the manager was shedding the backing of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes