🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following the club released the announcement of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

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

This individual he convinced to join the club when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the man he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous series of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Considering things he has said lately, he has been keen to get another job. He will view this one as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he give it up easily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant shocking development was the brutal way Desmond wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the expense of everyone else," stated Desmond.

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

The major figure, the club's dominant presence, moves in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the authority to take all the major decisions he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend team AGMs, dispatching his offspring, his son, instead. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the club with confidential missives to news outlets, but no statement is made in the open.

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

The official line from the club is that he resigned, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, one must question why did he allow it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why was the manager not removed?

He has accused him of spinning information in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary charge, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we discuss.

His Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

To return to happier times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. The manager praised the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was Desmond who drew the heat when Rodgers' comeback occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had his support. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the supporters turned into a love-in again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals clashed with the club's business model, though.

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened again, with bells on, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic went about their transfer business, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was frequently the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the necessity for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the costly another player and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well to date, with one already having departed - the manager demanded more and more and, often, he did it in public.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that purportedly came from a source associated with the organization. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

The fans were angered. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't support his vision to achieve triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be removed. Whether there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes