🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief short communication, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

In 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting in their place. And the man he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his critique, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He will see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club might well make a call to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," wrote he.

For somebody who values decorum and places great store in business being done with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further example of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's dominant figure, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with private messages to news outlets, but nothing is heard in public.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to remain. And that's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his invective, 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 accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of spinning things in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

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

Such an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager lauded Desmond at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, truly, to nobody else.

This was the figure who drew the criticism when his comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who left them in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when his ambition came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a risky strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a publication that purportedly originated from a source close to the organization. It said that the manager was harming the team with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his way out, that was the tone of the article.

The fans were angered. They now saw him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not back his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

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

The regular {gripes