🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the announcement of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

This individual he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and needed putting back in a box. And the man he once more relied on after the previous manager departed to another club in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has said lately, he has been eager to get another job. He'll view this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh way Desmond wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a branding of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else," wrote he.

For a person who prizes propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was a further example of how unusual things have become at the club.

Desmond, the club's dominant presence, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the authority to make all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not attend club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And it's just what he went against when going all-out attack on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the team is that he stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, carefully, one must question why he permit it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the manager not dismissed?

He has charged him of spinning things in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He claims his statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards members of the management and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

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

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

Looking back to happier days, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. The manager praised Desmond at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the criticism when Rodgers' comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

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

The shareholder had his support. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters became a affectionate relationship once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow way the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the necessity for what he termed "agility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the club splurged record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with one since having departed - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly came from a insider close to the club. It said that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his exit, that was the implication of the story.

The fans were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not back his plans to achieve triumph.

The leak was poisonous, of course, 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 learned no more about it.

At that point it was clear Rodgers was shedding the support of the individuals in charge.

The regular {gripes