🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic released the announcement of their manager's shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

The man he convinced to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting in their place. Plus the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the astonishing return of the former boss was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous circuit of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Considering things he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been eager to secure a new position. He will see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the most significant shocking moment was the brutal way the shareholder described the former manager.

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, this was another illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the important decisions he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not attend club AGMs, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to support the club with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And that's exactly what he went against when going full thermonuclear on the manager on Monday.

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

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his words "have contributed to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

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

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

Looking back to better times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

This was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Over time, the manager employed the charm, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' ambition clashed with Celtic's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the organization splurged record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with one since having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would usually downplay it and nearly reverse what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly originated from a insider close to the organization. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his exit, this was the tone of the article.

Supporters were angered. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't back his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was intended to hurt him, which it did. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes