Rodgers critics are now trying to claim the credit for Wednesday. They have no shame.

There are times when the media gets things wrong simply out of stupidity, and times they get things wrong deliberately, playing the fool rather than admitting bias.

The recent criticisms aimed at Brendan Rodgers fit squarely into that second category. Certain journalists, Keith Jackson among them, have suggested that Celtic’s performance somehow validates their prior criticism of Rodgers. Yet, those comments betray a profound misunderstanding of the manager and his approach.

Jackson claimed Celtic’s performance “proved Rodgers’ critics right.” But how could it? The criticism was that the manager’s style was too open, yet Rodgers has a long record of adapting his game plan when necessary. This isn’t just speculation; it’s on full display in his history, both at Celtic and elsewhere. A proper look at his career, particularly the pragmatism he displayed managing clubs outside of the typical “elite” circles, would have told them everything they needed to know. But that requires a level of diligence our media seems uninterested in applying.

As I’ve pointed out on this blog after the Dortmund match, Rodgers is more than capable of a pragmatic approach. Far from being set in his ways, he’s managed different types of teams in varied situations. Beyond Celtic and Liverpool, he’s also taken the reins at clubs like Leicester City—clubs not accustomed to competing for top honours, and often the underdog in the league. At Leicester, he not only took them to two European places but also brought them a domestic trophy, all while employing a more calculated style.

How do they imagine he pulled that off? The idea that Rodgers doesn’t have a pragmatic approach in his locker is absurd. His adaptability, evident to anyone paying attention, goes ignored by journalists looking for cheap criticism.

Yes, following the Dortmund game, Rodgers mentioned he wouldn’t abandon his style—comments that now look more like psychological warfare than stubbornness. It’s pretty clear he wanted our opponents to expect a high-pressing Celtic side and perhaps adjusted his plans accordingly. But rather than acknowledging the subtle tactical adjustments, and the deep thinking behind the little game of bluff he was playing the whole time, the media suggests he was pressured into a more conservative approach. They’re desperate to claim credit for what was, in truth, an obvious decision made by an experienced manager.

If anyone genuinely believes Rodgers, a manager of his calibre, didn’t carefully review that Dortmund performance to analyse what could be improved, they’re out of touch.

Rodgers is an elite-level manager; he doesn’t need the press or pundits to dictate tactics. The idea that these journalists or commentators pushed him to change is laughable. Imagine if bloggers like us tried to claim such credit. We’d be called arrogant, and rightly so. We may even be called delusional. The reality is Rodgers sat down, assessed the Dortmund game, and made necessary adjustments. This is what good managers do, and he’s one of the best around.

It’s as though some journalists want medals for spotting that we played poorly in Dortmund, as if it took any particular insight to point out the need for a defensive shift. At the end of the day, everyone who watched the game could see what went wrong.

The notion that Rodgers was somehow oblivious, only realising what was plain to the rest of us due to media pressure, is the kind of daft thing only our hacks could believe. Jackson clearly believes it, but then he’s the writer of the notorious “Motherwell born billionaire” piece; that man will buy the Kingston Bridge a hundred times over.

A manager of Rodgers experience doesn’t need external nudges to make informed decisions. The man is more than capable of independent analysis—frankly, that’s why he’s in the job, and they’re just writing about it.

Rodgers was in a no-win situation: if he hadn’t adjusted his tactics, the media would have crucified him for sticking to an open approach. And, let’s be honest, many fans might have joined in. But he did make those adjustments, and rather than give him the credit, they’re now scrambling to claim that they somehow influenced his choices. The boss deserves credit, as do his coaches and players. Those pundits angling for a share of the praise are deluded.

So, Jackson and others may claim that Rodgers’ critics were “right.”

But what, exactly, were they right about?

Did they identify something Rodgers himself missed? Hardly. Even Rodgers admitted that the team could have done better after the Dortmund match. The players didn’t reach their full potential in that game, and Rodgers knew it. The only way his critics would have had a legitimate point is if he’d failed to adapt in the next match, and that’s where they’d have had a field day.

But the hacks misread the man, failing to understand his willingness to adjust and adapt. They don’t grasp what makes him successful. How else can they explain his ongoing dominance in Scotland, with a trophy record that stands at nine out of ten? That’s not luck, it’s skill.

Rodgers’ record speaks for itself, but some members of the press refuse to acknowledge it, instead pushing narratives that suit their own agenda. They diminish his successes and act as though his achievements are incidental, lucky even. But as Celtic fans know, luck doesn’t win nine trophies out of ten. That’s the work of a meticulous, adaptable, and elite-level manager—qualities Rodgers has demonstrated time and time again.

In the end, the criticism doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

The media can try to position themselves as the insightful observers who “knew all along,” but fans see through it. We know what we have in Brendan Rodgers, and it’s a manager who learns, adapts, and leads with intelligence.

He’s shown he has the mettle to make tough calls, regardless of what the critics might say. While some may choose to ignore or undermine his achievements, Celtic supporters recognise what he’s building here. And we’ll give him and the team all the credit they deserve, despite the media’s best efforts to claim otherwise.