🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the news of their manager's surprising resignation via a brief short statement, the howitzer landed, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious anger.

In an extensive statement, major shareholder Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the team when Rangers were getting uppity in 2016 and required being in their place. Plus the man he again relied on after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was given over to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering things he has expressed recently, he has been eager to get a new position. He'll see this role as the perfect chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he experienced such success and adulation.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. Celtic could possibly make a call to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the most significant shocking development was the brutal way Desmond wrote of the former manager.

It was a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a labeling of him as untrustful, a source of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the cost of others," stated Desmond.

For somebody who prizes propriety and places great store in dealings being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

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

He does not attend club AGMs, sending his offspring, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's reluctant to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he contradicted when launching full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his criticism, line by line, one must question why he permit it to get such a critical point?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of all of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why had been the manager not removed?

He has accused him of spinning information in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

His Ambition Clashed with the Club's Model Again

To return to happier days, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager lauded Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the heat when his comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who left them in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Over time, Rodgers employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the fans turned into a love-in once more.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals came in contact with the club's business model, though.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for prospects to be secured, then not landed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Repeatedly he stated about the need for what he called "agility" in the market. The fans concurred with him.

Even when the club spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah already having departed - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he did it in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his subsequent news conference he would typically downplay it and nearly reverse what he stated.

Internal issues? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky strategy.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that purportedly originated from a insider associated with the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were enraged. They then viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his shield because his directors did not back his plans to achieve success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we learned no more about it.

At that point it was clear the manager was losing the support of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes