🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious anger.

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

The man he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the man he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was given over to an unending circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Based on things he has said recently, O'Neill has been eager to secure a new position. He will see this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club might well reach out to contact 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 - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' development was the brutal way the shareholder described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in business being done with discretion, if not outright secrecy, this was a further example of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the authority to take all the major decisions he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

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

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

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And it's just what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he resigned, but reviewing his invective, line by line, one must question why he allow it to get this far down the line?

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

He has charged him of spinning information in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He claims his statements "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable allegation, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Again

To return to happier times, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to no one other.

This was Desmond who took the heat when his returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Gradually, Rodgers employed the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an fragile truce with the fans became a affectionate relationship again.

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

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their transfer business, the interminable delay for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the need for what he termed "flexibility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a publication that purportedly came from a source close to the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his exit, this was the implication of the story.

Supporters were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his board members did not support his vision to achieve triumph.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was losing the backing of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes