How Irretrievable Collapse Led to a Savage Parting for Rodgers & Celtic FC

Merely a quarter of an hour after Celtic issued the news of their manager's surprising departure via a perfunctory short communication, the howitzer arrived, from the major shareholder, with clear signs in obvious fury.

Through 551-words, major shareholder Desmond eviscerated his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to join the team when their rivals were gaining ground in 2016 and needed putting in their place. Plus the figure he again turned to after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the astonishing comeback of Martin O'Neill was practically an after-thought.

Twenty years after his departure from the club, and after a large part of his recent life was dedicated to an unending circuit of appearances and the performance of all his old hits at Celtic, Martin O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

Currently - and perhaps for a while. Based on things he has said lately, O'Neill has been keen to secure a new position. He will 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.

Will he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. Celtic could possibly reach out to sound out Postecoglou, but the new appointment will act as a soothing presence for the moment.

All-out Attempt at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's reappearance - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' development was the harsh manner Desmond wrote of the former manager.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a labeling of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of untruths, a spreader of misinformation; disruptive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated he.

For somebody who prizes decorum and places great store in dealings being done with confidentiality, if not complete secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have become at the club.

The major figure, the organization's dominant figure, moves in the background. The remote leader, the individual with the power to make all the important calls he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He never participate in club AGMs, dispatching his son, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, does interviews about Celtic unless they're hagiographic in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the club with confidential missives to news outlets, but no statement is made in public.

This is precisely how he's preferred it to be. And it's just what he went against 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, line by line, one must question why he permit it to reach this far down the line?

If Rodgers is culpable of every one of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's guilty of, then it's fair to inquire why had been the coach not dismissed?

He has charged him of spinning things in public that were inconsistent with reality.

He says Rodgers' words "have contributed to a toxic environment around the club and encouraged hostility towards members of the management and the directors. Some of the criticism aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unwarranted and unacceptable."

Such an remarkable charge, that is. Lawyers might be preparing as we discuss.

His Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Model Again

Looking back to better times, they were close, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, really, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who took the heat when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

This marked the most controversial appointment, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the shameless one, who departed in the difficulty for Leicester.

Desmond had Rodgers' back. Gradually, the manager employed the persuasion, delivered the victories and the trophies, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship once more.

It was inevitable - always - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals came in contact with Celtic's business model, though.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired once more, with bells on, over the last year. Rodgers publicly commented about the sluggish process the team conducted their transfer business, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then not landed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was concerned.

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

Even when the club spent unprecedented sums of funds in a twelve-month period on the £11m Arne Engels, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have cut it so far, with Idah already having left - the manager demanded increased resources and, oftentimes, he did it in public.

He set a bomb about a lack of cohesion within the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his subsequent media briefing he would usually minimize it and almost reverse what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd claim. It appeared like Rodgers was playing a risky game.

Earlier this year there was a story in a newspaper that purportedly originated from a insider associated with the club. It said that the manager was damaging the team with his public outbursts and that his real motivation was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be there and he was arranging his way out, this was the implication of the story.

Supporters were enraged. They then viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his board members did not support his vision to bring success.

This disclosure was poisonous, naturally, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He demanded 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 the manager was shedding the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes