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

Merely fifteen minutes following Celtic released the announcement of their manager's surprising departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with clear signs in obvious fury.

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

This individual he persuaded to join the club when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. Plus the figure he again turned to after the previous manager departed to another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of Desmond's critique, the jaw-dropping return 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 unending series of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at the team, Martin O'Neill is returned in the dugout.

Currently - and maybe for a while. Based on comments he has said recently, he has been keen to secure a new position. He'll see this role as the ultimate chance, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he enjoyed such success and praise.

Will he give it up easily? It seems unlikely. The club could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve as a soothing presence for the moment.

'Full-blooded Effort at Character Assassination

O'Neill's return - as surreal as it may be - can be parked because the most significant 'wow!' development was the brutal way Desmond wrote of the former manager.

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

For somebody who prizes propriety and sets high importance in dealings being conducted with confidentiality, if not outright secrecy, here was another illustration of how unusual things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the organization's dominant figure, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the important decisions he wants without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

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

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the club with confidential messages to news outlets, but nothing is heard in the open.

This is precisely how he's wanted it to remain. And it's just what he contradicted when going all-out attack on the manager on Monday.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers stepped down, but reading Desmond's criticism, carefully, you have to wonder why he permit it to get this far down the line?

Assuming Rodgers is culpable of every one of the things that the shareholder is claiming he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to inquire why had been the manager not dismissed?

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

He claims Rodgers' statements "played a part to a hostile environment around the club and fuelled hostility towards members of the management and the board. Some of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

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

'Rodgers' Ambition Clashed with Celtic's Strategy Once More'

To return to happier times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Rodgers respected Dermot and, really, to no one other.

This was Desmond who took the heat when his returned happened, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other supporters would have described it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the lurch for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' support. Gradually, Rodgers employed the charm, delivered 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 clashed with Celtic's business model, though.

This occurred in his initial tenure and it happened again, with added intensity, recently. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team went about their player acquisitions, the endless delay for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Despite the organization splurged record amounts of money in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly another player and the £6m Auston Trusty - all of whom have performed well so far, with one since having left - Rodgers demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a insider associated with the organization. It claimed that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was managing his departure plan.

He didn't want to be present and he was arranging his way out, that was the tone of the article.

The fans were enraged. They then viewed him as similar to a martyr who might be carried out on his shield because his directors did not back his plans to bring success.

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

By then it was clear Rodgers was losing the support of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes