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

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the news of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a perfunctory short communication, the bombshell landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious anger.

Through 551-words, key investor Dermot Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were getting uppity in that period and required being in their place. And the man he again relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to another club in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of his takedown, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an continuous circuit of public speaking engagements and the playing of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and maybe for a time. Considering things he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to get a new position. He'll see this role as the perfect chance, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he relinquish it easily? You wouldn't have thought so. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Attempt at Character Assassination

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant shocking development was the brutal manner Desmond described the former manager.

It was a forceful endeavor at defamation, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the expense of others," wrote he.

For a person who prizes propriety and places great store in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright privacy, here was a further illustration of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's most powerful presence, moves in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the power to take all the major calls he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, dispatching his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, does media talks about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And still, he's slow to communicate.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the club with confidential messages to media organisations, but no statement is heard in the open.

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

The official line from the team is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing Desmond's invective, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to reach such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is culpable of all of the accusations that the shareholder is alleging he's guilty of, then it's fair to ask why had been the manager not dismissed?

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

He claims Rodgers' words "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the club and fuelled hostility towards individuals of the management and the board. Some of the abuse directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an extraordinary allegation, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Conflicted with Celtic's Strategy Again

To return to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers praised Desmond at every turn, thanked him every chance. Brendan deferred to him and, really, to no one other.

It was Desmond who drew the criticism when his comeback occurred, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial hiring, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who departed in the lurch for another club.

Desmond had his back. Over time, Rodgers employed the charm, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an fragile peace with the fans turned into a love-in once more.

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

It happened in his initial tenure and it happened again, with bells on, over the last year. He spoke openly about the sluggish process Celtic conducted their transfer business, the endless delay for prospects to be secured, then missed, as was frequently the case as far as he was believed.

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

Even when the organization splurged unprecedented sums of money in a twelve-month period on the expensive one signing, the £9m Adam Idah and the significant further acquisition - none of whom have performed well to date, with Idah since having departed - the manager pushed for increased resources and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity within the club and then walked away. Upon questioning about his comments at his next media briefing he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

Internal issues? No, no, all are united, he'd claim. It looked like he was playing a risky game.

A few months back there was a story in a newspaper that allegedly originated from a source close to the club. It claimed that Rodgers was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be there and he was engineering his way out, this was the implication of the story.

Supporters were angered. They then saw him as akin to a sacrificial figure who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't back his plans to bring triumph.

The leak was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to harm him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a probe then we learned no more about it.

By then it was clear the manager was losing the support of the people above him.

The frequent {gripes