🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following the club released the news of their manager's surprising departure via a brief five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and required being in their place. And the figure he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has said recently, O'Neill has been keen to secure a new position. He'll view this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who values propriety and places great store in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, here was another example of how unusual things have grown at the club.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, operates in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to take all the important decisions he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not participate in team AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the organization with confidential missives to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's exactly what he went against when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

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

If the manager is guilty of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to inquire why had been the manager not removed?

Desmond has accused him of spinning information in public that did not tally with the facts.

He claims his words "have contributed to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

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

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

Looking back to happier times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to no one other.

It was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Gradually, the manager employed the persuasion, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his goals came in contact with Celtic's business model, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for targets to be secured, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - 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 openly.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the team and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would usually minimize it and nearly reverse what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was playing a dangerous strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a insider close to the club. It claimed that the manager was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his way out, that was the implication of the story.

The fans were enraged. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't support his vision to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

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

The frequent {gripes