🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the news of their manager's surprising departure via a brief short statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

In an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he convinced to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. And the man he once more turned to after the previous manager left for another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and perhaps for a time. Based on things he has said lately, he has been eager to get another job. He will see this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and adulation.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the harsh way the shareholder described the former manager.

It was a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote he.

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

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the power to make all the major decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He does not participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, instead. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

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

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's exactly what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why did he allow it to reach this far down the line?

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

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

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and improper."

Such an remarkable charge, that is. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Once More'

To return to happier days, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was the figure who took the criticism when his returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

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

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with bells on, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the necessity for what he termed "agility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah since having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, often, he expressed this in public.

He planted a controversy about a internal disunity inside the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent media briefing he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a risky strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a publication that purportedly originated from a insider associated with the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his way out, this was the tone of the article.

Supporters were enraged. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not support his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was meant to harm him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was losing the backing of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes