🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following the club issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

The man he persuaded to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting in their place. Plus the man he once more turned to after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of his critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering things he has said recently, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He'll see this role as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the harsh manner the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a branding of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For somebody who values propriety and places great store in business being done with discretion, if not complete privacy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal things have become at the club.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the power to make all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to support the organization with confidential missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

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

The official line from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing his invective, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to get this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why was the coach not removed?

He has charged him of spinning information in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He says Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

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

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

Looking back to better times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to him and, really, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the heat when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, Rodgers employed the persuasion, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with bells on, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with one since having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly reverse what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like he was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a source close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging the team 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 way out, this was the tone of the article.

Supporters were enraged. They then saw him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his honor because his board members did not support his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure 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 no more about it.

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

The frequent {gripes