By the time the final whistle had sounded at Fir Park on Sunday, the tally stood at two anti-Dermot Desmond banners being unfurled in the visiting end and four outbreaks of chanting against Celtic’s major shareholder.

It probably said much about where we’re at right now that the demonstrations didn’t merit a single question in the post-match interviews.

There was a time when such things would have been newsworthy, but not now. For Celtic, this is the new reality. A disagreement where there’s no middle ground to be found. A conflict seemingly without end.

Establishing exactly when the first shot was fired isn’t all that easy but, by common consent, we’re now approaching its first anniversary.

Anti-board sentiments have been steadily growing around Celtic Park for several years now, but the moment when Desmond became the main target for the disaffected arrived the night on which Brendan Rodgers abruptly left the premises.

A man whose public utterances on all things Celtic are normally akin to that of a Trappist monk, Desmond’s 551-word late-night rant on October 27 took the breath away.

Celtic fans made their feelings knows about major shareholder Dermot Desmond

Desmond was targeted by protestors with tennis balls at St Andrews 

Accusing Rodgers of being ‘divisive, misleading and self-serving’ while claiming he contributed to a ‘toxic atmosphere’ around the club, this was an attempt to take a flamethrower to the reputation of the club’s most decorated living manager.

Back in town next June for a Q&A at Glasgow Royal Concert Hall, Rodgers’ response to those personal slights will be fascinating. It’s fair to say he’ll be playing to a captive audience.

If nothing else, Desmond’s actions that night in commandeering Celtic’s official website confirmed what many already suspected.

That when it comes to the running of the club, he is answerable to no one. If there was a member of the board who’d reservations about how unedifying a public flaying of Rodgers would look, then they did not have the gumption or the authority to stop it. And herein lies what many believe to be the most pressing issue.

With 32,772,073 ordinary shares, Desmond owns 34.45 per cent of Celtic. As he has been quick to stress himself in the past, he is the largest single shareholder, but not the owner. Why then, his growing band of critics ask, is he allowed to act like he is?

When Martin O’Neill was sipping his morning coffee in the King’s Road shortly after that bombshell statement went up online a year back, the number which flashed up on his phone belonged to Desmond.

Such events have become normalised when they are, in fact, irregular. Desmond is a non-executive director and a minority shareholder. Michael Nicholson is Celtic’s chief executive. Why wasn’t he leading the hunt for Rodgers’ successor? It’s literally his job.

There was nothing new in this, of course. Desmond has been conspicuous in such matters since the turn of the century when he famously had second thoughts about appointing Guus Hiddink and turned to O’Neill at the last second instead.

It’s the fact that his instinct for appointing the right man has invariably been correct down the years which has prevented the process from being questioned.

When you appoint the right manager at a football club, most other things tend to take care of themselves. Of the 25 titles which Celtic have fought for since the day when O’Neill was first appointed in 2000, they’ve won 20.

It’s this longstanding domestic domination which causes outsiders to question the basis for the protests against Desmond which were witnessed on the 15th green of the Old Course at the start of this month.

The answer lies in the growing fears of many over the trajectory the club is now on and its ability to modernise and thrive in the digital era.

The Celtic hierarchy watch on at Fir Park as the defending champions won 2-0 at Motherwell

Seen as the kind of business heavyweight that anyone would have wanted in their corner when he first invested under Fergus McCann in the mid-90s, few now see the 76-year-old billionaire as best serving the needs of the club going forward.

For so long the means to camouflage a poor European record which has seen the club fail to win a post-Christmas tie since 2004, the league titles and cups which Celtic have amassed for so much of this century are now under serious threat – primarily from a resurgent Rangers and Hearts.

This vulnerability is widely seen as self-inflicted, a consequence of a cash-rich business – which Desmond effectively leads – failing to function as it should.

How else could you possibly explain the sale of Kyogo Furuhashi to Rennes in January 2025 without a replacement waiting in the wings? Or the departure of Arne Engels to West Ham this summer on the eve of the Champions League play-off with LASK?

Celtic knew for a year that Kasper Schmeichel’s contract was ending. The Dane ground to a halt through injury three months before his deal was up. Yet, on the final day of the transfer window, they were scrambling about trying to finalise a loan deal for Sam Johnstone, second choice keeper at Wolves last season.

Are those examples indicative of a slick and progressive football club getting in front of issues and supporting the football department to the best of its ability? Few believe so.

It may not reflect well on the club’s executives, but, ultimately, they are only in their highly-remunerated posts because Desmond says so.

It’s not as if a lack of resources has been an issue. Celtic had £77.3million in cash reserves in June 2025, the consequence of an impressive Champions League campaign under Rodgers.

On the back of a courageous display in the knockout round against Bayern Munich, that summer felt like the moment of huge opportunity for all concerned.

Celtic had the resources to continue dominating domestically while belatedly making inroads in Europe. They also had a manager of proven pedigree to take them there.

Instead, to Rodgers’ chagrin, Nicolas Kuhn and Adam Idah were sold and not adequately replaced. Celtic lost to an atrocious Kairat Almaty side in the Champions League play-off without scoring a goal in 210 minutes.

By the October, Rodgers was on his way with O’Neill parachuted in after six years in managerial exile. Desmond’s insistence on then pressing ahead with the appointment of Wilfried Nancy was done despite the Frenchman throwing up multiple red flags.

Camilo Duran broke the deadlock in Celtic’s 2-0 victory away at Motherwell on Sunday

Nancy’s dismissal after eight games, with O’Neill returning, did nothing to alter the view that Desmond’s ability to spot a manager at 20 paces wasn’t quite what it used to be.

While the man from Kilrea did deliver a remarkable league and cup double last season, there was no question in anyone’s mind that Celtic had got away with one.

No team in the modern era had won the championship while losing eight games. The need for a major reset was glaring.

The early signings of Camilo Duran and Kasper Hogh pointed towards a change of direction. The flogging of Engels to West Ham for £22million – confirming yet another profitable transfer window – suggested otherwise.

Celtic’s hopes of returning to the Champions League were extinguished in a humiliating night in Linz.

To lose one tie at that stage would have been understandable. To lose six on the spin and eight in ten attempts was, for many, unforgivable and directly attributable to the way the club has lately been run.

With a home loss to Ferencvaros coming in between two defeats to Rangers prior to the international break, it felt like all the chickens had come home to roost.

It’s going to take more than one stellar performance against Motherwell to change the mood of the rank and file towards the hierarchy – and Desmond in particular – ahead of next month’s AGM.

The fact that the billionaire was absent last year – and, indeed at every meeting since 2006 – didn’t prevent the event turning into an ill-tempered rabble which was cut short by then chairman Peter Lawwell.

Since then, the cash reserves have dropped to £66.4million. There’s also been the Nancy debacle, two further underwhelming transfer windows and the LASK fiasco.

What we’ve not seen is anyone in authority taking ownership of the situation, outlining a vision of what Celtic should look like in the modern era and providing a road map of how it gets there.

On the back of another coruscating statement condemning the St Andrews stunt and severing ties with the Celtic Collective, no one who attends this year’s gathering should hold their breath about being informed of the grand plan.

Unlikely to pass off without representatives of the rival factions figuratively grabbing each other by the throat, the sporting citadel in the East End is more likely to resemble the Wild West again.

Those believing that chucking some tennis balls at Desmond on the 15th green may increase his willingness to sell up presumably also believe in the tooth fairy.

Even if he were minded to do so, purely hypothetically, anyone acquiring more than 30 per cent of the club would be compelled to make an offer to all other shareholders – in line with Rule 9 of the Takeover Code.

So, unless someone finds an estimated £410million down the back of the sofa, it’s a non-starter.

With Desmond refusing to sell and no one in any position to even ask the question of him, nothing changes any time soon. That smell of cordite is going to become extremely familiar.