🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a brief short statement, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious anger.

In 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

The man he persuaded to come to the club when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an unending series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has said lately, O'Neill has been eager to secure another job. He'll see this role as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Would he give it up easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well reach out to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be parked because the most significant shocking development was the harsh way the shareholder described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For somebody who prizes propriety and places great store in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal situations have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the power to take all the major decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the organization with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And it's exactly what he went against when going all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that he resigned, but reading his invective, line by line, one must question why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If the manager is culpable of all of the things that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the manager not removed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting information in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He claims his statements "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the team and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an extraordinary allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with the Club's Model Again

Looking back to better times, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the heat when his comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Over time, Rodgers turned on the charm, delivered the wins and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals clashed with Celtic's business model, though.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the necessity for what he termed "agility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the organization spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having left - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity within the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and nearly reverse what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider close to the club. It claimed that the manager was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his way out, that was the tone of the story.

The fans were angered. They then viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't support his vision to bring triumph.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to hurt him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was losing the backing of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes