🔗 Share this article

Merely a quarter of an hour following the club released the announcement of their manager's shock resignation via a brief short statement, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

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

This individual he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were gaining ground in that period and needed putting in their place. Plus the man he again turned to after the previous manager left for another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the astonishing comeback of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

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

For now - and perhaps for a time. Based on things he has said recently, he has been keen to get a new position. He will see this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a return to the environment where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

All-out Effort at Character Assassination

The new manager's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant shocking development was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a forceful attempt at defamation, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the expense of others," wrote he.

For somebody who values decorum and places great store in dealings being done with discretion, if not complete privacy, this was another illustration of how abnormal things have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization's dominant figure, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the important decisions he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not participate in club AGMs, sending his son, his son, instead. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in nature. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the organization with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's exactly what he went against when launching all-out attack on the manager on Monday.

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

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the manager not dismissed?

He has charged him of spinning information in public that did not tally with reality.

He says Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the team and fuelled hostility towards members of the management and the board. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

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

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

To return to happier times, they were close, the two men. Rodgers lauded Desmond at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the heat when his returned happened, after the previous manager.

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

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Over time, the manager employed the charm, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

There was always - always - going to be a point when Rodgers' goals clashed with Celtic's operational approach, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it happened once more, with added intensity, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic went about their player acquisitions, the interminable waiting for prospects to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Even when the organization spent record amounts of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it to date, with Idah since having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the team and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would usually downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

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

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

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not back his plans to bring triumph.

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

By then it was clear the manager was losing the support of the people above him.

The regular {gripes