🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour after the club released the news of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

The man he convinced to come to the team when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being back in a box. And the figure he again relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an unending circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, he has been keen to get another job. He will view this role as the perfect chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club might well reach out to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the time being.

All-out Effort at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be set aside because the most significant shocking moment was the harsh way the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

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

For a person who values propriety and places great store in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further example of how abnormal situations have become at the club.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, operates in the background. The remote leader, the one with the power to make all the important calls he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

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

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And it's exactly what he went against when going full thermonuclear on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his criticism, carefully, one must question why he allow it to get such a critical point?

If the manager is guilty of every one of the things that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of distorting information in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims his words "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the club and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

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

His Aspirations Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to happier days, they were close, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the criticism when his returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the supporters became a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his ambition clashed with Celtic's operational approach, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened again, with added intensity, over the last year. He publicly commented about the sluggish way the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the club spent 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 cut it so far, with one already having left - the manager demanded more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly came from a insider close to the club. It said that the manager was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

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

The fans were enraged. They now viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not support his plans to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain the manager was losing the backing of the individuals above him.

The frequent {gripes