🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after the club released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a brief five-paragraph communication, the howitzer arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

The man he convinced to come to the club when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the man he once more turned to after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous series 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 perhaps for a time. Considering comments he has said recently, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He will see this role as the perfect chance, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly reach out to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' development was the brutal manner Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in business being done with discretion, if not outright secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

The major figure, the club's dominant figure, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to make all the major calls he wants without having the obligation of justifying 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 speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the club with confidential missives to media organisations, but nothing is made in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And that's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on that day.

The directive from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading his criticism, line by line, one must question why did he allow it to get such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why was the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of spinning things in public that did not tally with reality.

He says his statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the board. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to happier days, they were close, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who drew the heat when his comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, Rodgers turned on the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the fans became a love-in again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals clashed with Celtic's business model, however.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow way the team went about their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were angered. They then saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his directors did not support his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be removed. If there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was shedding the backing of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes