🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Dermot Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting in their place. And the figure he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an continuous series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has said lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He will view this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well make a call to contact their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner Desmond described the former manager.

It was a forceful attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of others," stated Desmond.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further illustration of how abnormal situations have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never participate in club AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to support the organization with private missives to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And it's exactly what he went against when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The official line from the club is that he stepped down, but reviewing his invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If the manager is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire 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 his statements "played a part to a toxic environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who drew the heat when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - consistently - going to be a point when his ambition came in contact with the club's business model, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process Celtic went about their transfer business, the endless waiting for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was too often 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 funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like he was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

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

Supporters were enraged. They then saw him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not support his plans to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes