🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic released the news of their manager's shock departure via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell landed, from the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he convinced to come to the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the man he again turned to after the previous manager left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said recently, he has been keen to get a new position. He'll view this role as the perfect chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the biggest 'wow!' moment was the brutal way the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

This constituted a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the cost of others," stated Desmond.

For somebody who values decorum and sets high importance in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright privacy, this was a further example of how unusual situations have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the organization'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 obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He never attend club annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with private messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in the open.

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

The directive from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reading his invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to get this far down the line?

If Rodgers is guilty of every one of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why had been the manager not dismissed?

Desmond has charged 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 club and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and improper."

What an extraordinary charge, that is. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

His Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Model Again

Looking back to better times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial hiring, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other Celtic fans would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Over time, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters turned into a love-in again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a point when his goals clashed with Celtic's business model, though.

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened again, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team went about their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he spoke about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Despite the club splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - all of whom have cut it so far, with one since having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he did it in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the team and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd say. It looked like he was engaging in a risky strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a source associated with the organization. It said that the manager was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

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

The fans were angered. They then saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his directors wouldn't back his plans to achieve triumph.

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

At that point it was clear the manager was shedding the backing of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes