🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious fury.

In an extensive statement, key investor Desmond savaged his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to come to the club when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after much of his latter years was given over to an unending series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Considering things he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He will see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he experienced such success and praise.

Would he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the time being.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' development was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was a further example of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to support the club with confidential messages to media organisations, but nothing is heard in public.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And that's exactly what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading his criticism, carefully, one must question why did he allow it to reach this far down the line?

If the manager is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to ask why had been the coach not removed?

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

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

His Ambition Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

Looking back to better days, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers respected Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

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

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had his support. Over time, Rodgers turned on the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the organization splurged unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with one already having departed - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in public.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly came from a source associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his exit, that was the tone of the article.

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not support his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was shedding the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes