🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory short statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

This individual he convinced to come to the team when Rangers 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 another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after much of his recent life was given over to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to get a new position. He will view this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' development was the harsh manner the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated he.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, this was a further example of how unusual situations have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the power to take all the major calls he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but no statement is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And that's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading his invective, carefully, one must question why he permit it to get this far down the line?

If Rodgers is guilty of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of spinning things in public that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

What an remarkable charge, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Model Again

To return to happier times, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the criticism when his returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the fans became a love-in again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, however.

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. He publicly commented about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Despite the club splurged unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having departed - the manager pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a bomb about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It looked like he was playing a risky strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider associated with the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

The fans were angered. They then saw him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his directors did not back his plans to achieve triumph.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was losing the backing of the individuals in charge.

The regular {gripes