🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a brief five-paragraph communication, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

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

The man he convinced to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. And the figure he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Based on things he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure a new position. He'll view this role as the perfect chance, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Will he give it up easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' development was the harsh manner the shareholder described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," stated he.

For a person who values propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with discretion, if not outright secrecy, this was another illustration of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the authority to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend team annual meetings, sending his son, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the organization with confidential messages to media organisations, but nothing is made in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's just what he went against when going full thermonuclear on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, line by line, one must question why he allow it to get such a critical point?

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

He has accused him of spinning things in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his statements "played a part to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards members of the executive team and the board. A portion of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

To return to better times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, truly, to nobody else.

It was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had his back. Gradually, Rodgers employed the persuasion, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the supporters became a love-in again.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their transfer business, the endless delay for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having departed - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and nearly reverse what he stated.

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

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his way out, this was the implication of the story.

Supporters were enraged. They now viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors wouldn't back his plans to achieve triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was losing the backing of the people above him.

The regular {gripes