STUART KETTLEWELL’S POST-MATCH COMMENTS CONTAIN A SERIES OF ABSURD CLAIMS ABOUT DANNY RÖHL AS HE CALLS FOR AN INVESTIGATION

Stuart Kettlewell’s post-match response to Kilmarnock’s 0–3 loss was raw, pointed and full of indignation — and it’s already stoking debate across Scottish football. The Kilmarnock boss was sent from the touchline after an on-field outburst during the defeat, and afterwards he pulled no punches in criticising Rangers manager Danny Röhl, calling for greater scrutiny of officiating and referencing the simmering Robbie Deas VAR/penalty controversy that continues to rankle at Rugby Park. 

The result itself was emphatic: Rangers ran out 3–0 winners, a performance their head coach described as clinical and a sign of progress after earlier stumbles. Manager Danny Röhl praised the finishing and the clean sheet, while noting there is still room to improve game management. That result deepened Kilmarnock’s poor run and left Kettlewell visibly frustrated on the touchline. 

What happened on the touchline

Frustration boiled over late in the contest. According to match reports, Stuart Kettlewell was shown a red card after an incident near his technical area — widely described as him kicking a water bottle in anger — and the manager was then escorted from the touchline by his assistants as emotions ran high. The sight of a manager being dismissed is never a good look for the losing side, and for Kilmarnock it compounded a difficult afternoon. 

Kettlewell has a history of being vocally critical about refereeing decisions this season and in recent months; his latest dismissal will only add to the sense of mounting pressure around him and the team. He has previously demanded clearer rule interpretations from officials and the governing bodies, and after this defeat he again urged for answers and an investigation into perceived inconsistencies. 

The rant: accusations and the call for investigation

In his post-match comments, Kettlewell didn’t just lament the scoreline — he publicly questioned aspects of officiating and singled out the climate around the game that he feels is unfair to his players and club. While managers have a licence to be passionate, his language was described by some as “absurd” and over-the-top; others see it as the predictable reaction of a man defending his players and seeking accountability when decisions go against them. Whatever your perspective, the key point is that Kettlewell demanded that the authorities look into the incidents and provide transparency so that managers and fans know where they stand. 

That demand for scrutiny comes against a backdrop: Kettlewell has previously taken issue with VAR and the interpretation of handball/penalty decisions, most notably in incidents involving Robbie Deas. The manager has publicly questioned how referees and VAR reached their conclusions in past matches — and he referenced those grievances again after this defeat, suggesting the same problem of inconsistent decision-making persists. 

Robbie Deas: the lingering VAR row

Robbie Deas, the Kilmarnock defender, has been at the centre of a contentious refereeing episode earlier in the season — an episode that has continued to provoke argument and calls for clarity from managers. Deas himself has spoken of feeling “sickened” by VAR controversies while also admitting he wouldn’t scrap the technology outright. Kettlewell’s references to the Deas incidents were not just petty grievance; they were part of a broader plea for consistent rule application and clearer communication from referees and the SFA. 

It’s important to be precise: the Deas controversy was not created by this game, but it hangs over the club like a sore point. Kettlewell’s choice to highlight it after the loss to Rangers shows how historical grievances can shape post-match narratives and fan reaction — and why managers are quick to use the media spotlight to press for institutional change.

Danny Röhl’s perspective and the bigger picture

From the Rangers side, Danny Röhl was measured. He highlighted his team’s clinical finishing and praised individual performances, such as Bojan Miovski’s brace and the team’s defensive solidity. Röhl’s post-match mood was upbeat about his side’s progress, even if he acknowledged scope for improvement. That contrast — a calm winning coach versus an angered, sacked-off losing coach — makes for dramatic headlines but also reflects two very different post-match priorities: stability and progress on one hand, grievance and accountability on the other. 

For the SFA and match officials, Kettlewell’s public call for an investigation is another reminder that communication about decision-making matters. When managers feel rules are applied inconsistently, the governing bodies are pressured to respond — whether through formal reviews, public statements explaining rationale, or educational work with clubs and referees to try to avoid the same controversies recurring.

Reaction from pundits and ex-refs

When charged moments recur — refereeing decisions, VAR reversals, touchline expulsions — ex-referees and pundits often wade in. In prior high-profile instances, former officials have publicly analysed the footage and sometimes concluded the club was unlucky, or conversely that a decision was correct. Those expert voices play a dual role: they inform public debate, and they act as a check on both clubs and the governing bodies by offering an experienced reading of situations that, to the eye of the average fan, look opaque. In the Deas case, commentary has been mixed, and that confusion is precisely what Kettlewell is railing against. 

What this means for Kilmarnock and Kettlewell

A 0–3 home loss is bad enough; a red card for your manager and public demands for an investigation make the aftermath more combustible. For Kilmarnock, the questions are immediate: can the side regroup? How will the club discipline or support their manager after the touchline dismissal? And can Kettlewell channel his anger into tactical tweaks and motivational leadership rather than headline-grabbing outbursts? The next fixtures will be telling.

For the manager himself, there is also the reputational risk. Passion is a manager’s currency, but repeated confrontations with officials and public denunciations can erode goodwill among referees, pundits and — crucially — the club’s own board if results don’t follow. Conversely, if the SFA does open a review and produces clarifying guidance that vindicates some of his points, Kettlewell could use that as leverage to push for systemic improvements. 

Bottom line

Kettlewell’s post-match comments after the 0–3 defeat were emphatic and emotional: a manager publicly accusing the opposition coach of benefit from officiating decisions, calling for an investigation, and again pointing to the Robbie Deas VAR row that has shadowed Kilmarnock this season. Whether this turns into a formal probe or simply another chapter in the ongoing VAR debate depends on how the SFA and refereeing authorities respond — and on whether Kilmarnock can stop making headlines for all the wrong reasons on the pitch. 

If you’d like, I can:

• Pull together the exact quotes from Kettlewell’s press conference and link them inline. 

• Produce a short explainer on the Robbie Deas incident (video timestamps, referee guidance, VAR protocol) so readers understand precisely what Kettlewell is referring to.