🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he persuaded to come to the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting in their place. Plus the man he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Considering things he has expressed lately, he has been eager to get another job. He will view this one as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. The club might well make a call to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh way Desmond wrote of the former manager.

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual'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 secrecy, this was another illustration of how unusual things have become at the club.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the authority to make all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

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

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the organization with confidential messages to news outlets, but no statement is heard in public.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And it's exactly what he contradicted when going full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that Rodgers resigned, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, you have to wonder why he allow it to reach this far down the line?

If Rodgers is guilty of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of spinning things in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the management and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

Such an extraordinary allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

To return to happier days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded Desmond at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers respected Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

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

This marked the most divisive hiring, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters 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' back. Over time, the manager employed the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an fragile peace with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the club splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having departed - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He planted a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It said that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his exit, that was the implication of the article.

Supporters were angered. They now saw him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not back his plans to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it did. 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 plain Rodgers was shedding the backing of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes