The Way Unrecoverable Breakdown Resulted in a Savage Parting for Brendan Rodgers & Celtic FC

Just a quarter of an hour after Celtic released the announcement of their manager's surprising resignation via a brief short communication, the howitzer landed, courtesy of Dermot Desmond, with whiskers twitching in apparent fury.

In 551-words, major shareholder Desmond savaged his former ally.

The man he convinced to join the club when their rivals were getting uppity in 2016 and needed putting in their place. Plus the man he once more turned to after Ange Postecoglou left for another club in the recent offseason.

So intense was the ferocity of his critique, the jaw-dropping return of the former boss was practically an secondary note.

Two decades after his exit from the organization, and after much of his recent life was dedicated to an unending series of appearances and the performance of all his past successes at the team, Martin O'Neill is back in the dugout.

For now - and maybe for a time. Based on comments he has expressed lately, O'Neill has been eager to secure another job. He will see this role as the ultimate opportunity, a gift from the Celtic Gods, a return to the place where he experienced such glory and adulation.

Would he relinquish it readily? It seems unlikely. Celtic might well make a call to contact Postecoglou, but O'Neill will serve 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 biggest shocking moment was the harsh way the shareholder described Rodgers.

It was a full-blooded endeavor at defamation, a branding of Rodgers as untrustful, a perpetrator of untruths, a disseminator of misinformation; disruptive, deceptive and unjustifiable. "A single person's wish for self-preservation at the cost of everyone else," stated Desmond.

For somebody who prizes decorum and sets high importance in business being done with confidentiality, if not complete privacy, here was a further illustration of how abnormal things have become at Celtic.

Desmond, the club's most powerful presence, moves in the background. The absentee totem, the one with the authority to take all the important decisions he pleases without having the responsibility of justifying them in any open setting.

He does not participate in team annual meetings, sending his son, his son, in his place. He seldom, if ever, gives interviews about Celtic unless they're glowing in tone. And even then, he's reluctant to communicate.

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

This is precisely how he's preferred it to remain. And it's just what he went against when going full thermonuclear on Rodgers on that day.

The official line from the team is that Rodgers resigned, but reviewing his criticism, line by line, you have to wonder why did he permit it to reach this far down the line?

If the manager is guilty of all of the accusations that Desmond is claiming he's responsible for, then it's fair to inquire why had been the coach not dismissed?

He has accused him of spinning things in public that were inconsistent with the facts.

He claims Rodgers' statements "have contributed to a hostile atmosphere around the club and fuelled animosity towards members of the management and the directors. A portion of the criticism aimed at them, and at their loved ones, has been completely unjustified and unacceptable."

What an remarkable charge, indeed. Legal representatives might be mobilising as we discuss.

'Rodgers' Aspirations Clashed with the Club's Strategy Again

To return to better times, they were tight, Dermot and Brendan. Rodgers lauded the shareholder at every turn, thanked him whenever possible. Rodgers respected him and, really, to no one other.

This was the figure who took the criticism when Rodgers' comeback happened, post-Postecoglou.

It was the most divisive hiring, the return of the prodigal son for some supporters or, as other supporters would have put it, the return of the unapologetic figure, who left them in the lurch for Leicester.

The shareholder had his support. Over time, Rodgers turned on the persuasion, delivered the victories and the honors, and an fragile truce with the supporters became a affectionate relationship again.

There was always - always - going to be a moment when his goals came in contact with Celtic's operational approach, though.

It happened in his initial tenure and it transpired again, with bells on, recently. He spoke openly about the sluggish way the team conducted their player acquisitions, the interminable waiting for targets to be landed, then missed, as was frequently the situation as far as he was believed.

Repeatedly he spoke about the necessity for what he called "agility" in the market. The fans agreed with him.

Even when the club splurged record amounts of funds in a calendar year on the expensive one signing, the £9m another player and the significant Auston Trusty - none of whom have performed well to date, with one since having left - the manager pushed for increased resources and, oftentimes, he expressed this in public.

He set a controversy about a internal disunity inside the team and then distanced himself. When asked about his comments at his subsequent news conference he would typically downplay it and nearly contradict what he said.

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

A few months back there was a report in a newspaper that allegedly originated from a source close to the organization. It said that Rodgers was harming Celtic with his open criticisms and that his real motivation was orchestrating his departure plan.

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

The fans were enraged. They now viewed him as akin to a martyr who might be removed on his honor because his directors did not support his vision to bring triumph.

The leak was poisonous, of course, and it was meant to harm Rodgers, which it did. He called for an inquiry and for the responsible individual to be removed. Whether there was a examination then we learned nothing further about it.

By then it was plain Rodgers was losing the support of the individuals above him.

The regular {gripes