🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the announcement of their manager's shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the club when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting in their place. And the man he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham 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 performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has expressed recently, he has been keen to secure a new position. He will view this one as the perfect chance, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Would he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly reach out to contact their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the biggest shocking moment was the harsh manner Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote he.

For a person who prizes propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another illustration of how abnormal things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant presence, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to take all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club AGMs, dispatching his son, Ross, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is heard in public.

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

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

Assuming the manager is guilty of all of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the coach not dismissed?

He has accused him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally 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 board. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and improper."

Such an extraordinary allegation, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

His Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Again

To return to better times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers respected Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

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

This marked the most controversial hiring, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for another club.

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

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. He publicly commented about the sluggish way the team went about their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he termed "agility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Even when the club spent unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with one already having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next media briefing he would typically minimize it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He desired not to be present and he was arranging his exit, that was the tone of the article.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his plans to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes