🔗 Share this article

Just fifteen minutes following Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief five-paragraph communication, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent fury.

Through 551-words, key investor Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he persuaded to join the club when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. Plus the man he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping 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 given over to an unending circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a time. Considering things he has expressed lately, he has been eager to secure a new position. He will see this one as the ultimate chance, a present from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and praise.

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

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the biggest shocking development was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

It was a forceful endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and places great store in business being done with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, here was a further example of how unusual situations have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's dominant presence, operates in the background. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to make all the major decisions he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He never attend club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, Ross, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives 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 rare moment to defend the club with confidential missives to media organisations, but no statement is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And it's just what he went against when going all-out attack on Rodgers on that day.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reading his criticism, carefully, one must question why did he permit it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming the manager is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why was the manager not dismissed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting information in public that did not tally with the facts.

He claims his words "played a part to a hostile environment around the team and encouraged animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and improper."

Such an extraordinary charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

His Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Model Again

To return to better times, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers praised Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan respected him and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who drew the criticism when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, the manager employed the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' ambition clashed with Celtic's business model, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers publicly commented about the slow way Celtic conducted their transfer business, the endless delay for targets to be secured, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he called "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the club spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with one already having left - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would typically minimize it and nearly reverse what he said.

Internal issues? Not at all, all are united, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It said that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was engineering his exit, this was the implication of the story.

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't support his vision to bring triumph.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

By then it was plain the manager was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes