🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a brief short communication, the howitzer arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

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

This individual he persuaded to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and needed putting in their place. Plus the man he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

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

For now - and maybe for a time. Based on comments he has expressed lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He will see this role as the perfect chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

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 harsh manner the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

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

The major figure, the organization's most powerful figure, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not attend team AGMs, sending his son, Ross, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the organization with confidential missives to news outlets, but no statement is heard in public.

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

The directive from the team is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his criticism, line by line, one must question why did he allow it to reach this far down the line?

If Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why was the manager not removed?

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

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

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

His Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised Desmond at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, truly, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the heat when Rodgers' returned occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most divisive hiring, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the necessity for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having departed - the manager demanded increased resources and, often, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like he was engaging in a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a source close to the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was harming 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 engineering his exit, that was the tone of the article.

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't support his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was shedding the backing of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes