🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following the club issued the news of their manager's surprising departure via a perfunctory short communication, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

In 551-words, key investor Dermot Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he persuaded to come to the club when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the man he again relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an unending series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a time. Considering things he has expressed lately, he has been keen to get another job. He'll view this role as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the time being.

All-out Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh way Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a branding of him as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For somebody who values decorum and places great store in business being done with confidentiality, if not outright privacy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's dominant presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to make all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club annual meetings, sending his offspring, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks 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 confidential missives to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

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

The official line from the team is that he stepped down, but reading his criticism, line by line, one must question why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of all of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why was the coach not removed?

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

He claims Rodgers' words "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the club and fuelled hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

His Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to better times, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, really, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial hiring, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers employed the charm, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the fans became a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when his ambition clashed with Celtic's operational approach, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with added intensity, over the last year. He publicly commented about the slow way Celtic went about their transfer business, the interminable delay for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Despite the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - all of whom have performed well to date, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity within the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly originated from a source associated with the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his board members wouldn't support his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to hurt him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes