In the aftermath of a dramatic season, a serious meeting took place.
This gathering occurred in a Donetsk hotel room in October 2004, a little over a year after Celtic had appeared in the UEFA Cup final.
However, the atmosphere was far from celebratory. Key figures from Celtic—Brian Quinn (chairman), Dermot Desmond (major shareholder), and Peter Lawwell (chief executive)—were faced with a dilemma that had little to do with their 3-0 defeat against Shakhtar Donetsk in a Champions League matchup.
The core issue was this: how did a highly lucrative 2002-03 season, which featured a remarkable run to Seville alongside valuable broadcasting rights, end with the club incurring losses?
This loss exacerbated an already significant debt. What could be done to rectify the situation swiftly?
While the specific details of their discussions and decisions remain confidential, one merely needs to look at subsequent events to gauge the conclusions that were drawn.
Peter Lawwell has faced considerable criticism from supporters regarding Celtic’s perceived shortcomings.
Lawwell has maintained a long-standing connection with Celtic’s major shareholder, Dermot Desmond.
A youthful Lawwell in 2004, soon after taking over as chief executive from Ian McLeod.
Celtic needed to determine a sustainable path forward. If the existing model couldn’t support the club’s continued success, despite its remarkable achievements abroad, how could it maintain long-term viability?
This prompted Celtic to adopt a strategy of fiscal responsibility, thereby dismantling the wage structure that mirrored top English clubs.
This marked a pivotal turning point for the club. Supporters often lament that the club failed to evolve after Seville, didn’t adequately support the manager, or invest in the future.
In reality, Celtic was facing a critical situation that could’ve threatened its solvency if not addressed promptly.
The last two decades have shown how successful Celtic has been in not only solidifying its financial standing as one of Europe’s most admired clubs but also in achieving an unprecedented domestic dominance.
Celtic is now the largest club in Scotland, boasting the most season ticket holders, significant merchandise sales, lucrative sponsorship agreements, and numerous trophies. The club’s financial reserves are considerable, giving it substantial influence in both Scottish football and European circles.
Despite numerous confrontations with the Scottish media, Lawwell remains a respected figure.
Lawwell’s story is remarkable, yet he often plays the role of scapegoat. He takes blame for every setback, and criticism is frequently directed toward his position within the club.
As another transfer period approaches and a new season is on the horizon, critiques of Lawwell are readily found across various media. However, one might argue there’s a compelling case to recognize his pivotal role in an extraordinary period for the club.
Defending the chairman is straightforward, though it requires one to don protective gear against the barrage of harsh criticisms from his opponents.
First, complete transparency is necessary. Any endorsement of Lawwell is often dismissed as merely the opinion of ‘Peter’s Poodles’, a term used by some in the media. My acknowledgment of Lawwell’s contributions does not stem from personal attachment; in fact, he is someone I often clashed with during my years as a chief sports writer.
He fiercely defended Celtic and pursued the club’s interests with passion and political acumen. Our disagreements were intense, yet there was always a mutual respect.
Secondly, it’s crucial to acknowledge that some criticism is not only warranted but essential.
The repercussions of Covid and Celtic’s inability to achieve 10 consecutive titles prompted Lawwell’s departure.
Celtic holds significant meaning in the lives of many. It represents much more than just a football club, making it completely appropriate for its board and chief executive (now chairman) to be held under scrutiny.
This includes controversies surrounding the Living Wage, the balance between player expenses and income, and the challenges of maintaining a ‘family club’ identity while functioning as a public limited company. Lawwell’s popularity has fluctuated based on these issues, which is wholly expected.
Yet, an utterly absurd narrative exists suggesting that Lawwell is solely to blame for any shortcomings during his tenure, a notion not well-supported by evidence.
This perspective portrays the chairman as a figure who oversees every minor detail at Celtic, almost like a caricature villain from a movie. Such theories lack credibility. Lawwell’s current role has shifted to that of a diligent administrator handling business oversight, with most decisions concerning player transactions no longer falling within his jurisdiction.
A recent Celtic blogger with a solid track record of club insights has clarified this shift. Some may dismiss this as merely pro-Lawwell rhetoric, but it remains accurate.
For instance, it is well-known that Brendan Rodgers is primarily a Dermot Desmond appointment, meaning he has the major shareholder’s support and trust.
Lawwell and chief executive Michael Nicholson welcome Rodgers back to the club.
Is it plausible to claim that either Rodgers or chief executive Michael Nicholson must seek Lawwell’s approval for any transfer deals? This is a ludicrous notion that reflects a misunderstanding of the club’s internal operations.
Despite this, Lawwell and the facts surrounding this assertion are often criticized. The arguments against him have become excessive.
It is essential to create a fair assessment. Yes, there have been drawbacks; European progress has been disappointing and financial difficulties can be cited.
Yes, issues surrounding the Green Brigade have been mishandled. Recruitment remains a topic of ongoing debate, although it often goes unremarked that Celtic’s recent policies have resulted in financial surpluses while still delivering trophies, despite the recurring lament about failed transfer windows.
Yes, the controversy over the Living Wage was uncomfortable and problematic for those who view Celtic beyond just a corporation.
However, the advantages of Lawwell’s tenure are remarkable. I don’t use this term lightly.
Celtic celebrates its latest Scottish Cup victory, marking the 36th major trophy during Lawwell’s tenure.
As a child growing up in a working-class household in Glasgow’s south side, Lawwell witnessed Celtic claiming the title in 1966—only their second championship since World War II. The following year, he stood in a tracksuit on his birthday, celebrating as the Lisbon Lions returned with the European Cup. It was a moment of glorious triumph.
Yet, this heralded a transient period, not an enduring shift within Scottish football. While Celtic achieved nine consecutive championships, so did Rangers, and teams like Dundee United and Aberdeen emerged as leading clubs during separate time frames.
The landscape of the 21st century is vastly different. Since the turn of the millennium, Celtic has tallied a remarkable 41 trophies, with Lawwell at the helm for 36 of those triumphs. Blaming him for the failure to secure ’10 in a row’ overlooks his instrumental role in achieving those 36 successes.
Moreover, Celtic has demonstrated considerable financial success. Dismissing the significance of this achievement is short-sighted, especially when considering how financial mismanagement can jeopardize a club’s future. Under his leadership, Celtic Park has seen significant developments, and Lennoxtown has been constructed.
Celtic’s influence has grown over time. Previously, the club was embroiled in ongoing conflicts with domestic authorities. From Robert Kelly to Fergus McCann, key figures at Parkhead often clashed with regulators.
While Lawwell has occasionally expressed frustration over similar matters, he has skillfully advanced Celtic’s interests with a political finesse that contrasts with his brash public persona.
Lawwell has played a vital role in driving the charity work of Celtic to help those in need.
On an international scale, as vice-chair of the European Club Association, Lawwell has secured a position of influence within elite circles. It is undeniable that Celtic has reaped rewards from this relationship, particularly in preserving access to the lucrative group (now league) stages of the most prestigious club competition worldwide.
He has also overseen substantial growth within the Celtic Foundation. While McCann was the chief advocate for re-establishing the club’s charitable priorities, Lawwell has further advanced this mission, fostering a foundation that raises and allocates millions to those in need each year.
This acknowledgment is not intended as a campaign for canonization. Lawwell has had disagreements both within the club and externally. He is not without flaws, but every decision made has been in the best interests of Celtic. His experience has attracted interest from clubs like Liverpool and Arsenal, but he chose to remain at Parkhead.
Currently, Celtic stands at the pinnacle of domestic football while also navigating the challenges of international competition.
Celtic’s position today, bolstered significantly by Peter Lawwell’s contributions, can hardly be contested.
