🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the news of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In 551-words, key investor Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the club when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. And the man he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has said lately, he has been keen to secure another job. He will view this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly reach out to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest 'wow!' development was the brutal manner Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of others," stated he.

For somebody who prizes propriety and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, this was a further example of how unusual situations have become at the club.

The major figure, the organization's most powerful presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend team AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

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

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And that's exactly what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The directive from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reading his invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he allow it to get such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is culpable of every one of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why was the manager not dismissed?

He has charged him of distorting information in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says his words "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the management and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Again

Looking back to happier days, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to him and, really, to no one other.

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

It was the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had his support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the charm, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in again.

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

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team went about their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he spoke about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the costly another player and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having left - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It claimed that the manager was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his departure plan.

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

Supporters were enraged. They now saw him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't support his plans to achieve triumph.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be removed. If there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes