🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a perfunctory short statement, the howitzer arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

The man he persuaded to join the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and required being back in a box. Plus the figure he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has expressed recently, he has been keen to secure a new position. He will see this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest shocking development was the brutal manner Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another example of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the club with private messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And that's just what he went against when going full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, one must question why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting information in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He claims his words "have contributed to a hostile environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an extraordinary charge, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we discuss.

His Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised Desmond at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

It was Desmond who drew the heat when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had his back. Gradually, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the fans became a love-in once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when his goals came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, though.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team went about their transfer business, the interminable delay for targets to be secured, 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. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the organization spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - all of whom have performed well so far, with one already having departed - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent media briefing he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly came from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were enraged. They now saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his directors wouldn't back his plans to bring success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was shedding the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes