🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour after the club released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious fury.

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

The man he persuaded to join the club when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. And the figure he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of his takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a time. Based on comments he has said recently, he has been keen to secure another job. He will view this one as the ultimate opportunity, a present from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and adulation.

Will he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club might well reach out to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the time being.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' development was the brutal manner Desmond described the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who values propriety and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, this was another example of how abnormal situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the club's most powerful presence, operates in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

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

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

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And that's just what he contradicted when going all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's invective, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to get such a critical point?

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

He has accused him of spinning information in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He says Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary allegation, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

His Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Model Again

Looking back to better days, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected him and, really, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the heat when his comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Over time, the manager turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' ambition came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, however.

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow way the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he spoke about the necessity for what he termed "flexibility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Despite the organization spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it to date, with one since having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a source close to the organization. It said that the manager was harming the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his way out, this was the tone of the story.

Supporters were angered. They then viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't back his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the backing of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes