🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short communication, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

Through 551-words, key investor Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

The man he convinced to come to the club when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting in their place. And the figure he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Based on things he has said lately, O'Neill has been eager to get another job. He'll see this role as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Would he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal way the shareholder described Rodgers.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

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

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to make all the important calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He never participate in team AGMs, dispatching his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives interviews 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 defend the organization with private messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

This is precisely 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 he stepped down, but reading his criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If the manager is culpable of all of the things that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not dismissed?

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

He claims his statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards members of the management and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier days, they were close, the two men. Rodgers praised the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to him and, really, to nobody else.

It was the figure who took the heat when Rodgers' comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an uneasy peace with the supporters became a love-in again.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish way Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Despite the club splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well to date, with Idah already having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity within the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly reverse what he stated.

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

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a source associated with the organization. It said that the manager was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He desired not to be present 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 honor because his board members did not support his vision to achieve triumph.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes