by Aidan Connor
Right now, being a Celtic fan feels like being caught between two completely different worlds – the one we live in, and the one the board appears to believe we live in. On one side, there are supporters who continue to show up in the cold, singing, protesting, and desperate to feel real again. On the other hand, you have an executive team that hides behind statements and spreadsheets, as if we should be grateful simply to exist under their control. The atmosphere is not just flat, it is fractured. From the terraces the anger, exhaustion, and heartbreak is palpable. Rodgers’ departure was more than just another managerial change – it was a public breakdown of trust that had been building for years. The BBC called it “an explosion”, and it was exactly that. Everything happened at such a rapid pace, one minute Rodgers was talking about “never being more motivated” then he was gone, replaced by an out-of-control Desmond statement that made everything worse. Rather than dignity, we received defensiveness. Instead of calm, we had chaos. Desmond accused Rodgers of creating a “toxic environment”, but what about theboard’s own involvement in all of this? The negative atmosphere is not solely due to the manager’s actions but also to the culture of silence, questionable recruitment, and public relations.
That statement sounded more like a tantrum than leadership. Desmond’s claim that everything wrong at Celtic was due to one man’s “self-preservation” was completely tone-deaf. Poor recruitment, mixed messaging, and a complete lack of accountability have persisted for years. Not only has football regressed, but so has the connection. Celtic used to feel like a community. Now, it feels like a corporation that plays football on weekends. We have become customers rather than supporters, which is a tragedy. The fallout from Rodgers’ resignation and Desmond’s statement has only exacerbated the sense of disconnect. You could feel it outside Parkhead, where hundreds had gathered to protest before the Falkirk game. That wasn’t just anger for the sake of it but emotion boiling over from fans who had been shut out of their own club’s decisions. Communication is one-way, accountability is non-existent, and respect is long gone.
Despite the chaos, something changed when Martin O’Neill walked back through those doors. Seeing him on the sidelines again, arms raised, the crowd singing his name, was a reminder of what we’d lost. I was four years old the last time he managed us, but even on television, you could feel it, that spark, that old Celtic heartbeat. It wasn’t about tactics or nostalgia but about connection. For ninety minutes, it seemed like the fans and the team were back on the same page. You could see it in the players’ body language, the way they fought for each other, and the sound of the crowd roaring again after months of quiet. That feeling was once the foundation of this club – passion, purpose, and unity. Now we have a billionaire owner playing power games from a distance and a CEO shrugging off fan questions about recruitment. The irony is that Desmond’s line in his statement, “Celtic is greater than any single person,” has never felt more true. If it really is, why does it feel like one man is pulling all the strings? Why did he speak on behalf of the club rather than the chairman, CEO, or anyone else who is actually accountable? The club is not supposed to be one man’s plaything, it is supposed to belong to all of us. That’s why the rage runs so deep. It’s not about one bad season or one poor outcome; it’s about years of drift, arrogance, and distance. Fans want transparency, not soundbites. We want direction rather than division. Celtic supporters are not asking for miracles, they are asking for respect and a seat at the table. We deserve to help shape the club’s future rather than simply reacting to the next crisis. What transpired at the AGM served to cement the seemingly unbridgeable gap between the fans and the board.
When you look across Europe, it becomes clear how far behind we are in terms of fan power. Take Germany, for example – their 50+1 ownership rule ensures that, no matter how much money comes in, fans always have the majority say. It protects their clubs from being sold to the highest bidder while also fostering a genuine sense of community and trust. Consider St Pauli, a club playing in a major city in Germany that has many similarities to Glasgow in history and culture. It’s a club that lives within its means, remains true to its identity, and doesn’t forgets the fans who fill the stands every week. Those supporters are more than just customers, they are the heartbeat, decision-makers, and conscience. At Celtic, we feel a million miles away from that. We have a board that acts first and explains later, if at all, and a fanbase that is constantly reacting, protesting, and pleading to be heard. We fund the club, but when it comes to actual decisions – transfers, direction, leadership – we are kept in the dark. The German model demonstrates that it doesn’t have to be that way. You can run a massive, modern football club while remaining accountable to the people who matter most. Clubs such as Brentford and Brighton demonstrate that it is possible to be data-driven, strategic, and well-run while maintaining core fan values. Celtic could follow this model: use smart decision-making without losing the supporters’ heartbeat. Digital voting platforms, open AGMs, and transparent performance metrics for board members have the potential to hold the club to new levels of accountability. Fans want to see results in the boardroom as well as on the pitch. The psychological impact on supporters cannot be underestimated. Being ignored, misled, or sidelined breeds apathy, which destroys a club’s identity. Restoring engagement isn’t an option – it’s a requirement if Celtic is to thrive long-term.
Celtic has the potential to be a model for sustainable, inclusive, and ambitious football governance by learning from fan-led German clubs, community-focused English clubs, and innovative European models. Including supporters in decision-making, creating transparency, and combining smart professionalism with genuine passion is not a pipe dream – it is a necessity. Looking around Europe, there are clubs that strike a balance between strong fan involvement and smart, forward-thinking management. Club Brugge in Belgium operates under a clear strategy: an accountable board, a sporting director, and engaged but informed fans. Bodø/Glimt in Norway excels at innovative coaching, youth development, and team identity, supported by a football-focused board. Decisions over ego or short-term politics. Celtic could learn from these clubs by establishing a structure in which football decisions are made based on football rather than PR or personal agendas. This entails a clear chain of responsibility – a sporting director or football committee is in charge of hiring managers, approving transfers, and overseeing the youth pipeline, while fans serve as formal advisors to ensure accountability and transparency. We want a club that makes consistent, evidence-based, long-term decisions, protects and nurtures Celtic’s identity, and makes fans feel heard rather than shouted at online. Consider structured fan forums, quarterly briefings, and a supporter trust with legitimate voting rights.
The same is true for fan-owned or fan-led examples close to home. Hearts rebuilt themselves thanks to the Foundation of Hearts, a group of ordinary supporters who banded together to take back their club. It wasn’t easy, but it’s plain to see how secure and respected they are now. AFC Wimbledon rose from the ashes after being cut off from their community, demonstrating that collective passion can overcome even the worst corporate decision-making. These clubs may not be as large as ours, but they do have something we lack – trust between board and supporters. Imagine if we could capture even a fraction of that spirit and apply it at Celtic Park. Consider a structure in which fan representation is not just symbolic, but embedded in how the club operates. Where questions were not dismissed as “noise,” but rather as an essential component of creating something better. We shouldn’t be afraid of it, that’s how football was meant to be. Our club’s history was built on working-class people banding together for a common cause. Maybe it’s time to remember that. Lawwell and Desmond have dominated the narrative for decades, and their decisions, good or bad, have shaped our attitudes towards the club. What happens if they step aside? Or, as many fans secretly hope, are removed? A fresh start does not always imply progress. Whoever replaces them must have credibility, football knowledge, and an understanding of Celtic’s identity. This is more than just hiring someone with numbers or corporate experience; it’s about bringing in people who understand Celtic and why we exist.
This is where fan influence can make a significant difference. If a fan advisory board existed, it could advise and vet potential board members, ensuring that those who join respect the club’s traditions while also having the vision to modernise it. Consider a structure in which any new CEO, chairman, or executive must consult with and be approved by a supporter-elected panel before taking office. That is the type of safety net that other fan-supported clubs rely on. It also involves succession planning. New appointments should be scheduled gradually rather than in a chaotic manner. There must be continuity, not only in the CEO’s office, but also in sports strategy, youth development, transfer policy, and fan communication. A sudden, unchecked change at the top can reverse years of progress, no matter how well-intentioned the newcomers are. And here’s the reality check – if the current board were to leave tomorrow, fans would demand accountability right away. Not just press statements, not just promises, but a clear roadmap for governance and football strategy. Without that, the club risks repeating the mistakes of the past, with mismanaged transfers, unclear targets, and the same toxic disconnect we’re seeing today. Board turnover is about more than just who leaves; it’s about how we replace them, how we engage supporters, and how we ensure the club never again operates in a vacuum. Celtic is bigger than any individual, and the board should reflect that rather than ignore it.
When Brendan Rodgers walked out it felt like the entire club had been hit by a shockwave. Not because he was a villain – far from it – but because his departure was handled with complete secrecy. Then came Dermot Desmond’s statement, which sparked criticism from every direction. It was a lesson in what not to do in business, it felt like two teenagers breaking up. Trust, once broken, is difficult to rebuild. The takeaway is clear, clubs cannot rely solely on official statements to manage fan perception. Rodgers’ departure demonstrated that when the board fails to communicate clearly, the void is filled by speculation, frustration, and, frankly, anger. Fans are not passive consumers, we live, breathe, and analyse every word. If you ignore this, you risk alienating the members who keep the club going. There’s also a lesson about accountability. Desmond’s statement placed the blame on Rodgers while ignoring the board’s role in recruitment, transfers, and long-term strategy. Fans recognised it for the deflection it was. A responsible club would have addressed its role in the breakdown, admitted mistakes, and reassured fans that lessons had been learnt. That is the level of transparency that supporters expect: no finger-pointing, no PR spin, just honesty. Rodgers’ departure and the subsequent statement were both unexpected. Fans were left stunned then blindsided by the events of the AGM. Cadence, sequence, and clarity are all aspects of effective communication,in addition to content. If the club had handled the messaging more carefully, it could have reduced anger while maintaining a sense of calm. Instead, we have confusion and frustration, exacerbating the rifts. The takeaway for Celtic, and any club that wants to genuinely respect its fans, is straightforward – communicate early and clearly, and accept responsibility when things go wrong. Fans will not simply forgive, we will hold you to the standard that we believe the club is capable of.
Fans are becoming increasingly frustrated with what appears to be a concentration of power in one person. Decisions that should be made collectively; hiring managers, transfers and long-term strategy, frequently appear to go through Desmond first. The perception is that Celtic is no longer a “fans’ club”, but rather one in which a single voice dominates, sometimes at the expense of transparency and stability. The question is not just about removing him but also about establishing systems that prevent unilateral control. Consider a Celtic team in which Desmond is still a stakeholder, but decisions are made with input from the board, CEO, and fan advisory committee. The balance of power shifts from one individual to a transparent and accountable model. Removing Desmond outright may be politically and financially complex, but the real priority is structural reform. Fans must believe that decisions are made in the club’s long-term best interests, rather than at the whim of a major shareholder. If the club wants to regain trust, it must demonstrate that influence is balanced, accountability is enforced, and fans have a meaningful voice. Celtic is at a turning point. The turmoil of recent months, managerial upheaval, boardroom confusion and fan frustration that erupted into protests, has exposed deep cuts between the club and fans. There is an opportunity to reconsider what a modern Celtic should look like. One in which fans are more than just spectators, with their voices officially recognised through advisory boards, digital voting platforms, and open communication. Where decisions are not made from the top down, but rather through collaborative strategies that combine ambition, professionalism, and identity.
There’s also the lesson about breaking cycles. We’ve been here before with anger, protests, cosmetic fixes then silence. Celtic cannot afford to repeat this pattern. Change must be permanent, ingrained in governance, culture, and practice, rather than fleeting gestures that satisfy fans in the short term. It will take courage for the board to relinquish some control, accept accountability, and prioritise the club’s identity over personalities or profit. Finally, this is about rebuilding trust, reigniting passion, and ensuring that the club stays true to its core values. Fans are Celtic’s heart and when they feel excluded, apathy sets in, and the club suffers. Celtic can create a model that honours its history while embracing the modern game by actively listening to supporters, implementing transparent governance, and learning from fan-led examples across Europe. This is not just a project or campaign. It is about the club’s survival and flourishing in such a way that fans remain at the centre of the narrative. The task ahead will be difficult, but if Celtic does it correctly, it may emerge stronger, more united, and more vibrant than ever before. The next chapter in Celtic’s history should not be dictated by boardroom convenience or external noise – it should be written with, for, and by fans.
Great insight as to the way forward for our club.