🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes following the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he convinced to join the club when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the man he once more relied on after the previous manager departed to another club in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Based on comments he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He will see this one as the perfect chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to contact their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' development was the harsh way Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-preservation at the cost of others," wrote Desmond.

For a person who values propriety and places great store in business being conducted with discretion, if not outright secrecy, here was a further illustration of how unusual situations have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the power to make all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never participate in team AGMs, sending his son, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the club with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to be. And that's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

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

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why was the manager not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of spinning information in public that did not tally with reality.

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Again

To return to better days, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan respected him and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who took the heat when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had his support. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when his ambition came in contact with the club's business model, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he stated about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Even when the organization spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well to date, with one since having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like he was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly came from a source associated with the organization. It claimed that the manager was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

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

The fans were enraged. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't back his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it accomplished. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was shedding the backing of the individuals above him.

The frequent {gripes