How Irretrievable Breakdown Led to a Savage Separation for Brendan Rodgers & Celtic

Just fifteen minutes after the club issued the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short communication, the bombshell arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

The man he persuaded to come to the club when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and needed putting in their place. Plus the man he again relied on after the previous manager left for Tottenham in the summer of 2023.

So intense was the ferocity of his takedown, the astonishing return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the club, and after much of his latter years was given over to an unending series of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his old hits at Celtic, O'Neill is back in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Considering things he has expressed recently, O'Neill has been keen to get another job. He will see this one as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he give it up readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well reach out to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will act as a balm for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it may be - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' development was the harsh manner the shareholder described Rodgers.

This constituted a full-blooded attempt at defamation, a branding of him as untrustful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes decorum and places great store in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright privacy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal situations have grown at the club.

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

He never attend club annual meetings, sending his offspring, Ross, in his place. He rarely, if ever, gives media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an rare moment to defend the club with private missives to news outlets, but nothing is heard in public.

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

The directive from the club is that Rodgers resigned, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to reach this far down the line?

If the manager is culpable of every one of the things that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of spinning information in open forums that did not tally with the facts.

He claims his words "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the club and encouraged animosity towards members of the executive team and the directors. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable allegation, indeed. Legal representatives might be preparing as we discuss.

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

Looking back to better times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. The manager praised the shareholder at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who took the criticism when his comeback happened, after the previous manager.

It was the most divisive appointment, the return of the returning hero for some supporters or, as other Celtic fans would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for another club.

Desmond had his support. Gradually, Rodgers employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the fans turned into a affectionate relationship again.

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

This occurred in his initial tenure and it transpired once more, with bells on, recently. Rodgers publicly commented about the sluggish process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the necessity for what he termed "agility" in the transfer window. Supporters concurred with him.

Even when the club splurged unprecedented sums of funds in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the £9m another player and the £6m further acquisition - none of whom have performed well to date, with one already having departed - Rodgers demanded more and more and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He set a bomb about a internal disunity inside the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next news conference he would usually minimize it and almost contradict what he stated.

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

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly originated from a source close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was managing his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his exit, this was the tone of the story.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not support his plans to bring success.

This disclosure was damaging, of course, and it was meant to hurt Rodgers, which it accomplished. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. Whether there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was losing the backing of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes