🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes following the club released the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a brief five-paragraph statement, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

Through 551-words, key investor Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he convinced to come to the team when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. And the man he again turned to after the previous manager departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to secure another job. He will see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Would he give it up easily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly make a call to contact their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner the shareholder described the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values decorum and places great store in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, here was another example of how unusual situations have become at the club.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the power to make all the major decisions he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the club with private missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to be. And it's exactly what he went against when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he resigned, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, you have to wonder why did he allow it to reach this far down the line?

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

He has accused him of spinning things in public that did not tally with the facts.

He says his statements "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the board. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and improper."

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

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

To return to better times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the criticism when Rodgers' returned happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Over time, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish process the team went about their transfer business, the endless waiting for prospects 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 need for what he called "agility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with one since having left - the manager demanded more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly came from a insider associated with the club. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was arranging his way out, that was the tone of the article.

Supporters were enraged. They now saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't support his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

At that point it was clear Rodgers was losing the support of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes