🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes following Celtic released the news of their manager's surprising resignation via a perfunctory short communication, the bombshell landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

Through 551-words, key investor Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. And the man he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of his critique, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an continuous circuit of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He'll see this role as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Would he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well make a call to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the most significant shocking moment was the harsh way Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the expense of others," stated he.

For somebody who prizes decorum and places great store in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, here was a further example of how abnormal things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant presence, operates in the background. The remote leader, the one with the authority to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club annual meetings, sending his son, his son, in his place. 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 rare moment to defend the organization with private messages to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

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

The directive from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why did he allow it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is culpable of all of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the coach not dismissed?

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

He says his words "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary charge, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

His Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were close, the two men. Rodgers praised the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers respected him and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the victories and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters became a love-in again.

There was always - consistently - going to be a point when his goals came in contact with the club's operational approach, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers publicly commented about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Even when the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it so far, with one since having left - the manager demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly reverse what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider associated with the club. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his exit, this was the implication of the article.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not back his vision to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes