🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after the club issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

In an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he persuaded to come to the club when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. And the figure he again turned to after the previous manager left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of his critique, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an unending series of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Considering things he has said recently, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He'll view this one as the ultimate chance, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' development was the harsh manner the shareholder described the former manager.

It was a forceful attempt at character assassination, a branding of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the cost of others," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and places great store in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, this was a further example of how abnormal situations have become at the club.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the major decisions he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He does not attend team annual meetings, sending his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

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

It's exactly how he's preferred it to be. And that's exactly what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his invective, line by line, you have to wonder why did he allow it to reach such a critical point?

If Rodgers is culpable of every one of the things that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the coach not dismissed?

He has accused him of spinning information in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims his statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an extraordinary allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

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

Looking back to better times, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers respected Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

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

The shareholder had his support. Gradually, the manager employed the charm, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the fans became a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals came in contact with Celtic's business model, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, over the last year. He publicly commented about the slow process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the club spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with one since having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would typically minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a insider associated with the club. It claimed that the manager was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present and he was engineering his way out, that was the implication of the article.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not back his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes