🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the news of their manager's shock resignation via a brief short communication, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

The man he persuaded to come to the team when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the figure he once more turned to after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an unending series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said recently, he has been keen to get a new position. He will see this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such glory and adulation.

Will he give it up easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well reach out to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' development was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

It was a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote he.

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

Desmond, the club's most powerful figure, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to take all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He never attend team AGMs, dispatching his son, Ross, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the organization with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And it's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, line by line, one must question why did he allow it to get such a critical point?

If Rodgers is culpable of all of the things that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of spinning things in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He says his statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier times, they were close, 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 drew the criticism when his returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Gradually, Rodgers employed the persuasion, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic went about their transfer business, the interminable delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Even when the club splurged record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would usually minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It looked like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a insider associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his way out, this was the implication of the article.

Supporters were angered. They now saw him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his board members did not back his plans to achieve triumph.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an investigation and for the guilty person to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the backing of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes