🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the announcement of their manager's surprising departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the howitzer arrived, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

In an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the club when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. Plus the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was dedicated to an unending series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Considering things he has expressed lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He will see this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner the shareholder described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and sets high importance in business being done with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, here was a further example of how unusual things have become at the club.

The major figure, the club's dominant figure, operates in the background. The remote leader, the one with the power to take all the important decisions he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend team AGMs, sending his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the organization with confidential missives to media organisations, but no statement is heard in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And that's exactly what he contradicted when going all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The directive from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, carefully, one must question why he permit it to get this far down the line?

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

He has charged him of distorting information in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic environment around the club and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

What an extraordinary allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Once More'

To return to happier days, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the club spent unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah since having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in openly.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically minimize it and nearly contradict what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his way out, that was the tone of the story.

Supporters were angered. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not support his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was shedding the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes