🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic released the news of their manager's surprising departure via a brief short communication, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. And the man he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill 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 continuous series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has said lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He will see this one as the perfect opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well make a call to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be parked because the most significant shocking moment was the brutal way Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of others," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who prizes decorum and places great store in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not outright secrecy, here was a further example of how abnormal situations have become at the club.

Desmond, the club's most powerful figure, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He never attend team annual meetings, dispatching his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to support the organization with private messages to news outlets, but no statement is made in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's just what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the manager not removed?

He has accused him of distorting information in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He says Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic environment around the team and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the management and the directors. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

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

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

To return to happier times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was Desmond who took the criticism when his comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the fans turned into a love-in once more.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when his ambition clashed with Celtic's business model, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with bells on, recently. He spoke openly about the slow way the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the situation as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the necessity for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the organization splurged unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly another player and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah since having departed - the manager demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a insider associated with the organization. It claimed that the manager was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his exit, that was the tone of the story.

Supporters were enraged. They now viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was meant to harm him, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The regular {gripes