🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic released the news of their manager's shock resignation via a brief short communication, the bombshell landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In 551-words, major shareholder Dermot Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he persuaded to come to the club when their rivals were gaining ground in that period and required being in their place. Plus the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure another job. He will see this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the biggest shocking moment was the harsh manner the shareholder described the former manager.

It was a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of others," wrote he.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in business being conducted with discretion, if not complete privacy, here was a further example of how abnormal situations have grown at the club.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, moves in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not attend team AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to support the organization with private missives to news outlets, but no statement is made in public.

It's exactly how he's preferred it to be. And it's just what he went against when going full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the club is that he stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why he permit it to get this far down the line?

Assuming the manager is culpable of every one of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the coach not removed?

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

He claims his statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary charge, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we discuss.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier times, they were close, the two men. Rodgers praised Desmond at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

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

It was the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had his back. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, achieved the victories and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with added intensity, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the organization splurged unprecedented sums of money in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with one already having departed - the manager demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a source associated with the organization. It claimed that the manager was harming the team with his public outbursts 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 article.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not back his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was shedding the support of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes