🔗 Share this article

Merely fifteen minutes after Celtic released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock resignation via a perfunctory short statement, the bombshell arrived, from Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent anger.

In 551-words, key investor Dermot Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the man he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous circuit of appearances and the playing of all his past successes at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has said lately, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He'll view this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he experienced such success and adulation.

Will he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. The club might well reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

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

It was a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's desire for self-interest at the expense of others," wrote he.

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

Desmond, the organization's dominant presence, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the one with the power to take all the important decisions he wants without having the obligation of justifying them in any public forum.

He does not attend team annual meetings, sending his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives media talks about the team unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's slow to communicate.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the club with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

It's exactly how he's wanted it to be. And it's exactly what he contradicted when launching all-out attack on Rodgers on Monday.

The directive from the team is that he resigned, but reviewing Desmond's criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why was the coach not removed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting information in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a toxic environment around the club and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

His Ambition Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

Looking back to happier days, they were tight, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as other supporters would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, the manager turned on the charm, achieved the wins and the trophies, and an uneasy truce with the supporters turned into a love-in once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a point when his goals came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, however.

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be secured, then missed, as was too often the situation as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he stated about the necessity for what he termed "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans concurred with him.

Even when the club splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the expensive Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it to date, with one since having left - the manager pushed for more and more and, often, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then walked away. When asked about his remarks at his next media briefing he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he stated.

Internal issues? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It appeared like Rodgers was engaging in a dangerous game.

A few months back there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a source close to the organization. It said that Rodgers was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

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

The fans were enraged. They then saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not support his plans to achieve triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the guilty person to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we heard nothing further about it.

By then it was plain the manager was shedding the support of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes