🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following the club issued the news of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In an extensive statement, key investor Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he persuaded to come to the club when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and needed putting in their place. And the figure he again turned to after the previous manager left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after much of his recent life was given over to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering things he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to secure another job. He'll view this one as the perfect chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he relinquish it 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.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - as surreal as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal manner Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote he.

For somebody who values decorum and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, this was a further example of how unusual situations have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the power to make all the major decisions he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He never attend team annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the club with private messages to news outlets, but no statement is heard in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's exactly what he contradicted when going full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing his invective, carefully, you have to wonder why did he allow it to get this far down the line?

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to inquire why was the coach not removed?

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

He claims Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the directors. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an extraordinary charge, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we speak.

'Rodgers' Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Model Again

Looking back to happier days, they were tight, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

This was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters became a love-in again.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when his ambition 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 slow process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the club spent unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well so far, with one already having departed - Rodgers pushed for more and more and, often, he did it in public.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a source close to the club. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his way out, this was the tone of the story.

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not back his vision to bring triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

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

The regular {gripes