🔗 Share this article

Just a quarter of an hour following Celtic issued the news of their manager's surprising departure via a brief five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

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

This individual he convinced to come to the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting in their place. Plus the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

Such was the severity of Desmond's critique, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an continuous series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at the team, O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering comments he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been keen to get a new position. He'll see this one as the perfect opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and adulation.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

The new manager's reappearance - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal way Desmond described the former manager.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a source of untruths, a spreader of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-interest at the cost of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who prizes decorum and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was another example of how unusual things have become at the club.

The major figure, the organization's dominant presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the power to take all the major calls he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team AGMs, sending his son, Ross, instead. He rarely, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in nature. And still, he's reluctant to speak out.

There have been instances on an occasion or two to defend the organization with confidential messages to news outlets, but no statement is heard in the open.

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

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he allow it to get such a critical point?

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

Desmond has charged him of distorting things in open forums that did not tally with reality.

He claims his statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the criticism directed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, indeed. Lawyers might be mobilising as we discuss.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Once More'

To return to better times, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at every turn, expressed gratitude to him whenever possible. Rodgers deferred to him and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who drew the heat when his returned occurred, after the previous manager.

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 return of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had Rodgers' support. Gradually, the manager turned on the charm, delivered the wins and the honors, and an uneasy truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals came in contact with the club's operational approach, however.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow way the team went about their transfer business, the endless waiting for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was concerned.

Time and again he spoke about the need for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters agreed with him.

Even when the club splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well so far, with Idah already having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. When asked about his comments at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It looked like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It claimed that the manager was harming the team with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

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

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his honor because his board members did not support his plans to achieve success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to hurt him, which it did. He called for an investigation and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a examination then we heard no more about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was shedding the backing of the people in charge.

The frequent {gripes