🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes after Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief short statement, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

The man he persuaded to come to the team when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and needed putting back in a box. And the figure he again turned to after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an unending circuit of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has said lately, he has been keen to secure a new position. He will see this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he give it up easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic might well make a call to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - however strange as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal way Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-preservation at the cost of others," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being done with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's dominant figure, operates in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the important calls he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his son, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

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

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And that's just what he went against when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the team is that he stepped down, but reading Desmond's invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to inquire why had been the manager not removed?

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

He claims Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

To return to better days, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

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

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his goals clashed with the club's operational approach, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with bells on, recently. He spoke openly about the slow process Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, 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 called "agility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the club spent unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah since having departed - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his next news conference he would typically minimize it and almost contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It looked like he was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be there and he was engineering his way out, that was the implication of the article.

The fans were enraged. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not support his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt him, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

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

The regular {gripes