🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the announcement of their manager's surprising resignation via a perfunctory five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, courtesy of the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he convinced to come to the club when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. And the man he again turned to after the previous manager left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his critique, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has expressed recently, he has been keen to get another job. He'll see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the harsh manner the shareholder described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not complete privacy, here was another example of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

The major figure, the club's dominant figure, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the club with confidential missives to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to remain. And that's just what he went against when going all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his invective, line by line, one must question why did he permit it to get such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is guilty of all of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of distorting information in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an extraordinary charge, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

His Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to him and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the heat when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Gradually, the manager turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an fragile peace with the fans became a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals clashed with Celtic's business model, though.

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic went about their transfer business, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the situation as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he called "agility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the club splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well to date, with one already having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next media briefing he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly came from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his exit, this was the implication of the story.

The fans were enraged. They now saw him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't support his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

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

The regular {gripes