How Unrecoverable Breakdown Resulted in a Savage Separation for Brendan Rodgers & Celtic FC

Just fifteen minutes following the club released the news of Brendan Rodgers' surprising resignation via a brief five-paragraph statement, the howitzer arrived, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in obvious fury.

In an extensive statement, major shareholder Dermot Desmond savaged his old chum.

This individual he persuaded to come to the team when Rangers were gaining ground in 2016 and required being back in a box. And the man he again relied on after the previous manager left for another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the severity of Desmond's takedown, the jaw-dropping comeback of the former boss was practically an after-thought.

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

For now - and perhaps for a time. Considering comments he has expressed lately, he has been eager to secure a new position. He'll view this role as the perfect opportunity, a present from the Celtic Gods, a homecoming to the environment where he enjoyed such glory and adulation.

Would he relinquish it easily? It seems unlikely. The club 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 return - as surreal as it is - can be set aside because the most significant shocking development was the brutal way the shareholder described Rodgers.

It was a full-blooded attempt at character assassination, a branding of Rodgers as deceitful, a perpetrator of falsehoods, a spreader of misinformation; divisive, deceptive and unacceptable. "One individual's wish for self-preservation at the expense of others," stated Desmond.

For a person who prizes propriety and sets high importance in business being conducted with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, this was a further example of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's most powerful presence, operates in the margins. The absentee totem, the individual with the authority to take all the major decisions he pleases without having the obligation of explaining them in any public forum.

He never attend club AGMs, sending his son, his son, instead. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about the team unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to speak out.

He has been known on an occasion or two to support the organization with confidential missives to news outlets, but nothing is made in public.

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

The official line from the club is that Rodgers stepped down, but reviewing his invective, line by line, one must question why he allow it to get this far down the line?

Assuming the manager is culpable of all of the things that Desmond is alleging he's guilty of, then it is reasonable to ask why had been the manager not removed?

He has charged him of spinning things in open forums that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims his statements "played a part to a toxic atmosphere around the team and encouraged animosity towards individuals of the management and the board. A portion of the abuse aimed at them, and at their families, has been entirely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable charge, that is. Lawyers might be mobilising as we speak.

His Ambition Conflicted with the Club's Model Once More'

To return to happier days, they were tight, the two men. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at all opportunities, expressed gratitude to him every chance. Brendan deferred to Dermot and, truly, to nobody else.

It was Desmond who drew the criticism when Rodgers' comeback happened, after the previous manager.

It was the most controversial appointment, the reappearance of the returning hero for a few or, as other Celtic fans would have described it, the arrival of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the difficulty for another club.

The shareholder had Rodgers' back. Gradually, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, achieved the wins and the honors, and an uneasy peace with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

It was inevitable - consistently - going to be a moment when Rodgers' goals came in contact with the club's business model, however.

It happened in his first incarnation and it transpired again, with bells on, over the last year. He publicly commented about the slow process Celtic conducted their player acquisitions, the endless waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Time and again he stated about the need for what he called "flexibility" in the transfer window. The fans concurred with him.

Despite the organization spent record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - all of whom have cut it to date, with Idah since having departed - Rodgers pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the club and then distanced himself. When asked about his remarks at his next news conference he would usually downplay it and nearly contradict what he stated.

Lack of cohesion? Not at all, everybody is aligned, he'd say. It looked like Rodgers was engaging in a risky strategy.

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that purportedly came from a source associated with the club. It said that the manager was harming Celtic with his public outbursts and that his true aim was orchestrating his exit strategy.

He didn't want to be present and he was engineering his exit, this was the implication of the article.

Supporters were angered. They now viewed him as similar to a sacrificial figure who might be carried out on his shield because his board members did not back his vision to achieve success.

This disclosure was damaging, naturally, and it was intended to harm him, which it did. He demanded for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be dismissed. If there was a probe then we learned nothing further about it.

At that point it was plain Rodgers was losing the support of the people in charge.

The regular {gripes