🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following the club released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising departure via a brief short statement, the bombshell arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

Through 551-words, key investor Dermot Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the man he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a time. Considering comments he has said recently, he has been keen to secure another job. He will view this role as the perfect chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the place where he experienced such success and adulation.

Would he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's return - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' development was the harsh way the shareholder described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the expense of others," wrote Desmond.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in business being conducted with discretion, if not complete privacy, this was another illustration of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the club's dominant figure, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to take all the major calls he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not attend team annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the organization with confidential missives to news outlets, but no statement is made in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And that's exactly what he contradicted when going all-out attack on the manager on that day.

The directive from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading his criticism, line by line, one must question why did he allow it to get such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why was the coach not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting information in public that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and improper."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with the Club's Model Once More'

Looking back to better times, they were close, the two men. The manager praised the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan deferred to him and, truly, to no one other.

It was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the returning hero for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, the manager employed the charm, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the fans became a love-in once more.

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

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the endless waiting for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he stated about the necessity for what he called "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Despite the organization splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well to date, with one already having left - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his next media briefing he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a source close to the club. It claimed that the manager was damaging Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his departure plan.

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

The fans were angered. They now saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not support his vision to achieve success.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to harm Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

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

The regular {gripes