🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Dermot Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he convinced to join the club when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the man he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

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

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Based on things he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He will see this one as the perfect chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well reach out to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the time being.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh way Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For a person who values propriety and sets high importance in business being done with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, here was a further illustration of how unusual situations have become at Celtic.

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

He does not attend team annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with private missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to remain. And it's exactly what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, one must question why he allow it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the manager not removed?

He has charged him of distorting information in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable charge, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

His Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

To return to happier times, they were close, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was Desmond who took the criticism when his comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most divisive appointment, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, delivered the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the organization spent record amounts of money in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it so far, with one since having left - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a bomb about a lack of cohesion within the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly originated from a insider associated with the organization. It said that the manager was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be there and he was engineering his way out, this was the tone of the article.

The fans were angered. They then saw him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not back his vision to achieve triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it accomplished. He demanded for an investigation and for the guilty person to be removed. Whether there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

By then it was plain the manager was losing the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes