🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club released the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

In 551-words, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous circuit of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Based on things he has expressed recently, he has been eager to get 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 experienced such glory and praise.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

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

It was a forceful endeavor at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-preservation at the cost of others," stated Desmond.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in business being done with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another example of how abnormal things have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not participate in team annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with private messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to be. And it's just what he went against when going full thermonuclear on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the team is that he resigned, but reading his criticism, line by line, one must question why he permit it to get this far down the line?

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

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

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

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

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

To return to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

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

Desmond had his support. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

There was always - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, though.

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow way the team went about their transfer business, the interminable delay for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he called "agility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Even when the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a bomb about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and nearly reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that allegedly originated from a source close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his way out, this was the tone of the story.

Supporters were enraged. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his board members did not back his plans to bring triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to harm 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 nothing further about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes