🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

This individual he convinced to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. Plus the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

Such was the ferocity of his takedown, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has said recently, he has been eager to get a new position. He'll view this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

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

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the expense of others," stated Desmond.

For somebody who prizes propriety and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright privacy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal situations have grown at the club.

The major figure, the organization's most powerful figure, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to take all the important decisions he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club annual meetings, sending his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the club with confidential messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And that's exactly what he went against when going all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The official line from the team is that he resigned, but reading Desmond's invective, carefully, one must question why he allow it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He says Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the club and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

What an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to better times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

This was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had his back. Over time, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the fans became a affectionate relationship again.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers publicly commented about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the club splurged unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well to date, with one already having left - Rodgers demanded more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly came from a insider close to the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

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

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

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was shedding the support of the individuals in charge.

The regular {gripes