🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the news of their manager's surprising resignation via a brief short statement, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he persuaded to come to the team when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. And the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an continuous series of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a time. Based on comments he has said lately, he has been keen to get another job. He'll view this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking moment was the brutal way Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values decorum and sets high importance in business being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was another illustration of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major decisions he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not participate in club AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with private messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And that's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why he allow it to get such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not dismissed?

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

He says his statements "have contributed to a hostile environment around the team and fuelled hostility towards members of the management and the board. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

Such an extraordinary allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

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

To return to better days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Over time, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the fans became a affectionate relationship again.

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

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the club spent unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and nearly reverse what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a insider close to the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his exit, this was the implication of the story.

The fans were angered. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his directors did not back his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes