🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell arrived, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

Through an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. And the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of his critique, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his exit from the organization, and after much of his latter years was dedicated to an continuous circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and perhaps for a time. Considering comments he has expressed recently, he has been eager to secure a new position. He will view this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

Would he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will serve as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's return - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh way the shareholder wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-preservation at the cost of others," wrote Desmond.

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

The major figure, the club's dominant figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the authority to take all the important calls he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any public forum.

He never participate in club annual meetings, sending his son, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And that's just what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The directive from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reading Desmond's invective, line by line, you have to wonder why he allow it to reach such a critical point?

If Rodgers is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the manager not removed?

He has charged him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He says Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with Celtic'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 every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, really, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the heat when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Over time, the manager employed the charm, achieved the victories and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in again.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when his ambition came in contact with the club's operational approach, though.

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish way the team conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Even when the club spent record amounts of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well to date, with one since having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It looked like he was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a insider close to the club. It said that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be there and he was engineering his exit, that was the tone of the article.

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

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was shedding the backing of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes