SPFL HAS JUST RELEASE WHAT STUART KETTLEWELL SAID TO THE REFEREE KEVIN CLANCY DURING THE GAME,IT IS HEARTBREAKING
Views: 5557
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
A storm erupted at Rugby Park after Kilmarnock’s home clash with Rangers when referee Kevin Clancy brandished a red card to Kilmarnock boss Stuart Kettlewell following an angry confrontation on the touchline. The moment — captured live on TV and replayed across social feeds — has already dominated post-match debate, driven a wave of online anger, and left questions about referee-manager relations, club discipline and whether any formal action will follow. Major outlets and fan pages published versions of what was reportedly said at the time; however, at the moment there is no clear public record of an official, verbatim SPFL press release containing the exact quote.
The incident itself was ugly and visceral. With Kilmarnock trailing and emotions high, Kettlewell was seen remonstrating aggressively from his technical area before a heated exchange with Kevin Clancy. Cameras caught Kettlewell kicking a water bottle and shouting towards the officials; Clancy responded by showing the red card, and Kettlewell was escorted down the tunnel by his assistant as tension among the crowd rose. The dismissal punctuated a difficult night for the Ayrshire side, who conceded three goals and never recovered.
What was said — and whether it justified an immediate red — is now the subject of intense scrutiny. Multiple tabloid reports and social posts say the SPFL “released what Stuart Kettlewell said to the referee,” and those versions describe language that, according to the tabloid headlines, “made Kevin Clancy award him a red card.” But — and this is important — searches of official SPFL channels and mainstream wire services at the time of writing do not produce a formal SPFL statement that reproduces a verbatim transcript of an exchange between Kettlewell and Clancy. Instead, the accounts circulating publicly are either match reports, TV commentary transcriptions or press reactions summarising the manager’s conduct rather than publishing a word-for-word release from the governing body. Readers should therefore treat the precise wording in social posts with caution until an official release is posted.
Why that matters: the difference between a manager being red-carded for “abusive and/or offensive language” (a disciplinary category clubs and the SPFL regularly reference) and a manager being red-carded for a single, targeted personal slur is huge in terms of both the sanction and reputational impact. In Scottish football, misconduct toward match officials can lead to touchline bans, fines and even FA/league investigation if the language or behaviour breaches specific rules. The governing bodies typically prefer to release summaries of misconduct rather than verbatim verbal exchanges — partly to avoid amplifying offensive language and partly because press reports can sensationalise short, heated moments. That said, the appetite for transparency among supporters and pundits means that whenever a controversial sending-off happens, pressure mounts on the SPFL to publish either a report or at least a disciplinary outcome.
A quick look at the protagonists’ records gives useful context. Stuart Kettlewell — a coach with a long track record in Scottish football who most recently took charge of Kilmarnock — is no stranger to making forceful public statements about refereeing across his career. He has been outspoken in the past on VAR and officiating decisions, and those prior remarks have sometimes landed him in the crosshairs of the media and disciplinary panels. Supporters sympathetic to Kettlewell will frame his reaction as the boil-over of a manager who feels his team have been harshly treated; detractors will say managers are responsible for keeping their composure and protecting their players.
Kevin Clancy is an experienced referee who has officiated at the highest levels in Scotland and on UEFA fixtures. He is, however, a polarising figure among some fanbases after high-profile decisions over recent seasons drew criticism. Clancy’s career includes contentious calls that have attracted headlines and, on at least one earlier occasion, sparked police interest after abusive communications were aimed at him following televised matches. That historical background helps explain why any incident involving Clancy immediately escalates on social media: a lot of fans already view him through a prism of suspicion, so a red card in a high-profile fixture is fuel on a ready fire.
The fallout moved fast. Within minutes of the final whistle, pundits, club channels and fan forums were debating whether Clancy had overreacted, whether Kettlewell crossed a line, and whether the match officials had made the night’s decisive interventions. On one side, those who back Clancy say referees must be supported — touchline abuse and intimidation of match officials have been clear wearing issues in British football and are rightly policed. On the other, there are voices demanding greater transparency from the SPFL: if the governing body is going to punish a manager, many argue, it should either publish the facts clearly or at least outline the process that will follow.
There is also a safety and wellbeing dimension. The culture of social media abuse aimed at match officials has been widely condemned by football authorities because it places referees and their families at real risk. Kevin Clancy himself was the subject of police inquiries after receiving threatening messages in a separate, high-profile Old Firm incident in previous seasons — a reminder that heated decisions on the field can spill into dangerous, off-field conduct from a tiny minority of supporters. Governing bodies and clubs often urge restraint in public commentary to avoid fanning such flames; yet the relentless churn of matchday headlines makes it difficult to contain outrage.
So what happens next? There are a few likely steps:
• The SPFL and/or the match commissioner may compile an official match report that records dismissals and notes if formal misconduct will be referred to a disciplinary panel. If an official report is filed that includes specific allegations of abusive language, a hearing could follow — with sanctions ranging from a touchline ban to monetary fines depending on the severity.
• The club (Kilmarnock) could issue its own statement — either defending or condemning the manager’s behaviour — and that tone often signals whether the club will contest any disciplinary findings vigorously.
• Media outlets and pundits will continue to press for transparency; if the SPFL does release a summary or charge, it will become the basis for most follow-up coverage. If no formal charge is laid, that too will be talked about — supporters often interpret silence or a light penalty as evidence of inconsistency.
Beyond the short legalisms of discipline there is a wider cultural point: emotions in Scottish football run deep and the proximity and intensity of fans to clubs here make every controversial call feel personal. Managers are the visible lightning rods of that emotion. A manager angrily confronting a referee makes for dramatic TV and motivates column inches, but it risks escalating an already ugly trend — the normalisation of aggressive behaviour towards match officials. The simple, practical rule remains: if you are a manager, you are expected to protect your players and your staff from losing control on the touchline. If you are a fan, express your views — but not in ways that target individuals or encourage abuse.
For now, the key facts are clear: Stuart Kettlewell was sent off by Kevin Clancy after an on-touchline confrontation during Kilmarnock’s match with Rangers; video of the moment circulated widely; various outlets summarised what was said; and a formal, verifiable SPFL transcript reproducing the manager’s words was not readily discoverable in official channels at the time of writing. That uncertainty about the precise wording of the exchange is why the next few days will be crucial — not only for any formal disciplinary outcome, but for how the SPFL chooses to balance transparency with the responsibility not to amplify potentially offensive language.
If you’re watching closely: look for an SPFL match report or a formal charge notice in the coming days, and for an official club statement from Kilmarnock. Those documents will move the discussion from conjecture to established record. Until then, what remains is a visceral image — a manager furious, a referee decisive, and a football public divided between sympathy and condemnation. It’s the kind of episode that feeds debates about respect, accountability and the future conduct of the game in Scotland.
Sources & further reading: match coverage and post-match reports; Kilmarnock club material on Stuart Kettlewell; historical context on referee Kevin Clancy’s career and prior incidents.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Post Comment