🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes following Celtic released the announcement of their manager's surprising resignation via a brief short statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious anger.

Through 551-words, key investor Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he convinced to come to the club when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and required being back in a box. Plus the man he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Based on things he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to secure a new position. He will view this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such success and adulation.

Will he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the harsh way Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

It was a forceful attempt at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated he.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not outright secrecy, here was a further example of how unusual situations have become at the club.

The major figure, the organization's most powerful figure, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the major calls he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team annual meetings, sending his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's slow to speak out.

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

It's exactly how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on Rodgers 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 get this far down the line?

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

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He says Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

Such an extraordinary charge, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

His Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Again

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

This was Desmond who took the heat when his comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Gradually, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the supporters became a love-in once more.

There was always - consistently - going to be a moment when his goals came in contact with the club's business model, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with bells on, over the last year. He publicly commented about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

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

Even when the organization spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the team and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like he was engaging in a risky game.

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was harming the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He desired not to be there and he was engineering his exit, that was the tone of the article.

The fans were enraged. They now saw him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his honor because his board members did not support his vision to achieve triumph.

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

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

The regular {gripes