The Way Irretrievable Collapse Resulted in a Savage Separation for Rodgers & Celtic

Just a quarter of an hour following the club issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief five-paragraph statement, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his former ally.

The man he convinced to join the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting back in a box. Plus the man he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the summer of 2023.

Such was the ferocity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, 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 the team, Martin O'Neill is back in the manager's seat.

For now - and perhaps for a while. Based on comments he has said lately, O'Neill has been eager to secure another job. He'll view this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the club's legacy, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Would he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly reach out to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's return - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the biggest shocking moment was the harsh way Desmond wrote of Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful attempt at character assassination, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "A single person's desire for self-preservation at the cost of others," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who values propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have grown at the club.

The major figure, the club's dominant presence, moves in the background. The remote leader, the one with the authority to take all the important decisions he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any open setting.

He never attend club annual meetings, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He rarely, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And still, he's slow to speak out.

He has been known on an rare moment to support the organization with confidential messages to news outlets, but no statement is made in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to be. And it's exactly what he went against when going all-out attack on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he allow it to reach this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is guilty of every one of the things that the shareholder is claiming he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to inquire why was the manager not dismissed?

Desmond has accused him of distorting information in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He says Rodgers' words "played a part to a toxic environment around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the executive team and the directors. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their families, has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable."

What an remarkable allegation, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we speak.

His Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were close, the two men. The manager lauded Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Rodgers deferred to Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

This was Desmond who took the criticism when Rodgers' returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for a few or, as some other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had his back. Over time, the manager turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the supporters turned into a affectionate relationship once more.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened once more, with added intensity, recently. He publicly commented about the sluggish process the team went about their transfer business, the interminable delay for targets to be landed, then missed, as was too often the case as far as he was believed.

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

Despite the organization spent record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m further acquisition - all of whom have cut it to date, with one already having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he expressed this in public.

He planted a controversy about a lack of cohesion inside the team and then walked away. Upon questioning about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost reverse what he said.

Lack of cohesion? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It appeared like he was playing a risky strategy.

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that purportedly came from a insider close to the club. It said that Rodgers was damaging the team with his open criticisms and that his true aim was managing his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present 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 martyr who might be removed on his honor because his directors wouldn't back his vision to achieve triumph.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was intended to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a examination then we heard nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was losing the backing of the individuals in charge.

The frequent {gripes