🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

In an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he convinced to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the figure he once more turned to after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was given over to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Based on comments he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure another job. He'll see this role as the perfect chance, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well make a call to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

All-out Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal manner Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at defamation, a branding of him as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," stated he.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful figure, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he wants without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team AGMs, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

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

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

The official line from the team is that he stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to reach such a critical point?

If the manager is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not removed?

He has charged him of spinning things in open forums that were inconsistent with reality.

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a toxic environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the board. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

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

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

To return to better times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was the figure who drew the heat when Rodgers' returned occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had his back. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, achieved the victories and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - consistently - going to be a moment when Rodgers' ambition clashed with the club's business model, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. He publicly commented about the slow process the team went about their transfer business, the interminable 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 termed "agility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - the manager demanded more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity within the team and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would usually downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a report in a publication that purportedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He desired not to be there and he was arranging his exit, this was the tone of the article.

The fans were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not support his vision to achieve success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes