🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic released the news of their manager's surprising departure via a brief short communication, the bombshell landed, courtesy of the major shareholder, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

In an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his former ally.

This individual he convinced to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the figure he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

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

For now - and perhaps for a time. Considering things he has expressed recently, he has been eager to get another job. He will see this role as the ultimate chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Will he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

All-out Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant shocking development was the brutal manner the shareholder wrote of the former manager.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote he.

For a person who values decorum and places great store in business being done with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was a further example of how unusual situations have grown at the club.

Desmond, the club's most powerful figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to take all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He never participate in club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's slow to speak out.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the club with private missives to news outlets, but no statement is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to remain. And that's just what he went against when launching full thermonuclear on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing his criticism, line by line, one must question why did he allow it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is guilty of every one of the things that the shareholder is alleging he's responsible for, then it's fair to ask why was the manager not dismissed?

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

He claims his statements "played a part to a toxic environment around the team and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and improper."

What an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Again

Looking back to better times, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Brendan respected him and, truly, to nobody else.

This was the figure who took the criticism when his returned happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

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

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the market. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the organization spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the costly Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it to date, with one already having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider close to the organization. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

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

The fans were angered. They then saw him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his directors did not support his plans to achieve triumph.

The leak was damaging, of course, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. 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 plain Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The regular {gripes