🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

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

The man he convinced to come to the club when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and required being in their place. And the man he again relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Based on things he has said recently, he has been eager to get a new position. He'll see this role as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have become at the club.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful figure, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to take all the major calls he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend team annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the organization with private missives to news outlets, but no statement is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And that's just what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on that day.

The directive from the team is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, carefully, one must question why he permit it to get such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it's fair to ask why had been the manager not dismissed?

He has charged him of distorting things in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

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

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

To return to happier times, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who took the heat when Rodgers' returned occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Over time, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the supporters turned into a love-in again.

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

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. He spoke openly about the slow process the team went about their player acquisitions, 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 necessity for what he called "agility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Even when the organization spent unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah since having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd claim. It looked like he was playing a dangerous game.

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It said that the manager was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

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

The fans were angered. They then saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his board members wouldn't back his plans to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was shedding the support of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes