The Way Irretrievable Collapse Led to a Savage Separation for Brendan Rodgers & Celtic

Just fifteen minutes following the club released the announcement of Brendan Rodgers' shock departure via a brief short statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of the major shareholder, with clear signs in apparent anger.

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

The man he convinced to join the team when Rangers were getting uppity in that period and required being back in a box. And the figure he once more relied on after Ange Postecoglou departed to Tottenham in the recent offseason.

Such was the severity of his critique, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was almost an after-thought.

Two decades after his departure from the organization, and after a large part of his latter years was given over to an unending series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, O'Neill is returned in the manager's seat.

For now - and maybe for a time. Based on things he has expressed lately, he has been keen to secure another job. He will view this one as the perfect opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the place where he experienced such glory and praise.

Will he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club might well reach out to contact their ex-manager, but O'Neill will act as a soothing presence for the time being.

'Full-blooded Effort at Reputation Destruction'

O'Neill's return - however strange as it is - can be set aside because the most significant 'wow!' moment was the brutal manner Desmond described Rodgers.

This constituted a forceful endeavor at character assassination, a labeling of him as deceitful, a source of falsehoods, a disseminator of falsehoods; divisive, misleading and unacceptable. "One individual's desire for self-interest at the expense of everyone else," wrote Desmond.

For somebody who prizes propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with discretion, if not complete secrecy, this was a further illustration of how unusual things have grown at Celtic.

The major figure, the club's dominant presence, operates in the margins. The remote leader, the individual with the authority to take all the major calls he wants without having the responsibility of explaining them in any open setting.

He does not attend club annual meetings, dispatching his offspring, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's slow to speak out.

There have been instances on an rare moment to defend the organization with private missives to media organisations, but nothing is heard in the open.

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

The directive from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing Desmond's invective, line by line, one must question why he permit it to get such a critical point?

Assuming the manager is culpable of all of the accusations that Desmond is alleging he's responsible for, then it is reasonable to ask why was the manager not dismissed?

Desmond has charged him of distorting information in public that did not tally with reality.

He claims Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged hostility towards members of the management and the board. A portion of the criticism directed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and improper."

Such an remarkable allegation, that is. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we speak.

His Ambition Conflicted with Celtic's Model Once More'

Looking back to happier times, they were close, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, thanked him whenever possible. Brendan respected Dermot and, truly, to no one other.

This was Desmond who drew the criticism when his returned occurred, post-Postecoglou.

This marked the most divisive appointment, the reappearance of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as some other Celtic fans would have put it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his back. Over time, the manager employed the charm, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile peace with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - consistently - going to be a moment when his goals clashed with the club's operational approach, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with added intensity, over the last year. Rodgers spoke openly about the slow process the team conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for prospects to be landed, then not landed, as was too often the situation as far as he was believed.

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

Despite the organization spent record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the £11m one signing, the costly Adam Idah and the £6m Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well to date, with Idah already having left - the manager demanded increased resources and, often, he expressed this in openly.

He planted a bomb about a internal disunity inside the team and then distanced himself. Upon questioning about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would typically downplay it and almost contradict what he said.

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

Earlier this year there was a story in a publication that allegedly came from a source close to the club. It claimed that the manager was damaging Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his departure plan.

He desired not to be present and he was arranging his exit, that was the implication of the story.

The fans were enraged. They now saw him as similar to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his board members wouldn't back his plans to achieve success.

The leak was damaging, naturally, and it was meant to hurt him, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. If there was a probe then we heard no more about it.

By then it was clear Rodgers was shedding the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes