🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after the club issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a perfunctory five-paragraph statement, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

The man he convinced to join the club when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and needed putting in their place. Plus the figure he once more turned to after the previous manager departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the playing of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, he has been keen to secure another job. He'll see this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Would he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well make a call to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will serve as a balm for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

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

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For somebody who values decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's most powerful presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He never attend team annual meetings, sending his son, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is heard in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he went against when going all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, line by line, one must question why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

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

He has accused him of spinning things in public that did not tally with the facts.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him every chance. Rodgers respected Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who took the heat when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the return of the returning hero for a few or, as some other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Over time, Rodgers turned on the charm, achieved the victories and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it happened again, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he termed "agility" in the market. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it so far, with one since having departed - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity inside the team and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next media briefing he would typically minimize it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, all are united, he'd say. It appeared like he was engaging in a risky strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It said that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not support his plans to achieve success.

The leak was damaging, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was shedding the backing of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes