🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic released the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious anger.

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

This individual he convinced to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the figure he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

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

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after a large part 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.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Based on comments he has expressed lately, he has been keen to secure another job. He will see this role as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he experienced such success and praise.

Would he relinquish it 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 soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the most significant shocking development was the brutal manner Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," stated he.

For somebody who prizes propriety and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, here was a further illustration of how unusual things have become at the club.

The major figure, the organization's dominant figure, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to make all the important calls he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, his son, instead. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

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

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And it's just what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the team is that he resigned, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to get this far down the line?

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

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

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a hostile environment around the team and fuelled hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

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

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Model Once More'

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

This was the figure who took the heat when Rodgers' comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when his ambition clashed with Celtic's business model, however.

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow way Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Even when the club splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with one since having left - the manager demanded more and more and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly originated 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 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 then saw him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't back his vision to bring success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was losing the backing of the individuals above him.

The frequent {gripes