🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after Celtic released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a brief short statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

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

The man he convinced to come to the club when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and needed putting in their place. And the figure he again relied on after the previous manager left for another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the ferocity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after much of his latter years was given over to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering things he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been keen to secure another job. He'll view this role as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. The club might well make a call to contact their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the biggest shocking development was the harsh manner the shareholder described the former manager.

It was a forceful attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

For somebody who prizes decorum and sets high importance in business being conducted with discretion, if not complete privacy, here was another illustration of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the club's most powerful figure, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the major decisions he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend team annual meetings, sending his son, Ross, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's slow to speak out.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the organization with confidential messages to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And that's just what he went against when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's invective, carefully, one must question why he permit it to get such a critical point?

If the manager 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 accused him of spinning information in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards members of the management and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable allegation, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

His Aspirations Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Again

Looking back to happier days, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

It was Desmond who took the criticism when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had his support. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' ambition clashed with the club's business model, however.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with added intensity, over the last year. He publicly commented about the sluggish way the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Even when the club splurged record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the £9m another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It claimed that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his departure plan.

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

The fans were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his vision to achieve success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was shedding the backing of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes