🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after the club released the announcement of their manager's shock resignation via a brief short statement, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

In 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he convinced to join the club when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. Plus the figure he again relied on after the previous manager departed to another club in the recent offseason.

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

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after much of his recent life was given over to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Considering comments he has expressed recently, he has been eager to secure another job. He'll view this one as the perfect chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such glory and adulation.

Will he give it up easily? 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.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking moment was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated he.

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

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the authority to make all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not attend team AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

There have been instances on an rare moment to support the club with confidential missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in the open.

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

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reading his criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why he permit it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the coach not removed?

He has charged him of distorting things in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards members of the management and the directors. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

What an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to better days, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan respected him and, truly, to nobody else.

It was the figure who drew the heat when Rodgers' returned happened, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his goals clashed with the club's operational approach, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team conducted their transfer business, the endless waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the organization spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with one since having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider close to the club. It claimed that the manager was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

The fans were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not back his plans to bring success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it accomplished. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was losing the backing of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes