🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a brief short statement, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

The man he convinced to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting in their place. And the figure he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has expressed lately, he has been eager to secure another job. He will see this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Will he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly make a call to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' development was the harsh way Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a branding of him as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote he.

For a person who prizes propriety and places great store in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, this was a further example of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to make all the major calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

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

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

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

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why had been the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting things in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He says his statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards members of the management and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier times, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the criticism when Rodgers' comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most divisive appointment, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Over time, the manager employed the charm, achieved the wins and the honors, and an fragile truce with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when his ambition clashed with Celtic's business model, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers publicly commented about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite 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 - all of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb 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 nearly contradict what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

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

The fans were angered. They now saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't support his plans to bring success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

At that point it was clear Rodgers was losing the backing of the people above him.

The regular {gripes