🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the news of their manager's shock resignation via a brief short statement, the bombshell landed, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious anger.

Through an extensive statement, key investor Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

The man he persuaded to join the club when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and needed putting back in a box. And the figure he once more turned to after the previous manager departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping return of Martin O'Neill was almost an secondary note.

Twenty years 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 the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, he has been keen to get a new position. He'll view this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and praise.

Will he give it up readily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club might well reach out to contact Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - however strange as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

It was a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of him as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's wish for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote Desmond.

For a person who prizes propriety and places great store in business being conducted with discretion, if not outright privacy, here was another example of how unusual things have grown at the club.

The major figure, the organization's most powerful figure, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in club AGMs, dispatching his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does interviews about the team unless they're hagiographic in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the organization with confidential missives to media organisations, but no statement is made in the open.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And it's just what he contradicted when going full thermonuclear on the manager on that day.

The directive from the club is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's invective, carefully, one must question why did he permit it to get such a critical point?

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

He has accused him of spinning things in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unjustified and improper."

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

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with the Club's Strategy Once More'

To return to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who drew the heat when Rodgers' returned happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Over time, the manager turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his goals clashed with the club's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the sluggish way the team conducted their transfer business, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Despite the club spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have cut it so far, with one since having left - the manager demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a lack of cohesion within the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would usually minimize it and nearly contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It said that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

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

Supporters were angered. They now saw him as akin to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his board members wouldn't back his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, of course, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He called for an investigation and for the guilty person to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

By then it was plain the manager was shedding the backing of the individuals above him.

The frequent {gripes