RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
22 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Flanagan
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:22 pm  

User avatarPumpetypump wrote:
Pumpetypump User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2002 12:55 pm
Posts: 7595
Location: LS9

Wasn't signing him in the first place a response to us falling into the bottom tier as he'd proved with Hunslet that he was more than capable at that level. He's had his dream gig at the club he supports and perhaps time for an amicable parting?
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 4:28 pm  

User avatarBullseye wrote:
Bullseye User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 12:04 pm
Posts: 30175
Location: The Corridor of Uncertainty
Pumpetypump wrote:
Wasn't signing him in the first place a response to us falling into the bottom tier as he'd proved with Hunslet that he was more than capable at that level. He's had his dream gig at the club he supports and perhaps time for an amicable parting?


Sounds like it. If Chalmers hadn't messed up the finances we'd probably still have Wildie. Something doesn't feel right about this incident but we are where are.
"If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them," - Wayne Bennett.
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 4:48 pm  
Stockwell & Smales Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 3:02 pm
Posts: 256
Could we use Race as backup hooker off the bench. Not much difference between hookers and half backs nowadays.
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:12 pm  

Downbutnotout Stevo's Armpit

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:17 pm
Posts: 73
Now I don't know whether George is innocent or guilty but from what I have gleaned things don't sit easily. The video seems to be pretty inconclusive and more telling perhaps is that JK said he was mystified why the charge had been brought. To me that seems to suggest an element of doubt. Now would the disciplinary tribunal convict if there was any doubt - probably not. So there must some other evidence to back up the guilty verdict. Now wouldn't it be great if in the spirit of transparency the tribunal made public what that further evidence was. I'm not holding my breath.
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:27 pm  

bulls2487 wrote:
bulls2487 Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:56 am
Posts: 561
Downbutnotout wrote:
Now I don't know whether George is innocent or guilty but from what I have gleaned things don't sit easily. The video seems to be pretty inconclusive and more telling perhaps is that JK said he was mystified why the charge had been brought. To me that seems to suggest an element of doubt. Now would the disciplinary tribunal convict if there was any doubt - probably not. So there must some other evidence to back up the guilty verdict. Now wouldn't it be great if in the spirit of transparency the tribunal made public what that further evidence was. I'm not holding my breath.


Full report below.
GEORGE FLANAGAN - BRADFORD
FEATHERSTONE V BRADFORD - CHALLENGE CUP
RANGE OF RECOMMENDED SANCTIONS IN RELATION TO CHARGED GRADE* :
8+

DETAILS OF CHARGE / REASON FOR NF :
Law 15.1 (i) Grade F – Attack to testicles

DECISION:
Charge

INCIDENT:
Attack to testicles in the 32nd minute

PLEA:
Not Guilty

SUMMARY OF CM'S SUBMISSIONS ON THE CHARGE / EVIDENCE:
Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 25th March, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(i) during the above Match. The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 32nd minute of the above Match. The incident was placed on report. In the Panel’s opinion, after completing a tackle you promoted your hand to the groin area of an opponent (Bussey) and applied pressure to the genital area. The Panel believed that your actions were unnecessary, had the potential to cause your opponent an injury, against the true spirit of the game and constitute Misconduct. In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade F offence (Behaves in way contrary to the true spirit of the game – Testicles attacking). In accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is 8 plus matches.

SUMMARY OF PLAYER'S SUBMISSIONS ON THE CHARGE / EVIDENCE:
Player in attendance alongside Head Coach John Kear and Assistant Coach Mark Dunning. JK talked the panel through the footage and explained that the player was making a tackle and attempting to slow down the play the ball. He vehemently denies the accusation that have been levelled at the player. He explains that there is no contact shown on the footage and feels that the opponents reaction was not immediate and also that following the opponent took full part in the kick chase will resulted immediately after play had resumed. He felt that this would not be possible if the alleged act had occurred as the opponent would have been in pain. JK again denied that the player had done it and stressed that this is a very serious accusation and could be potentially career ending for his player. He felt the charge is not proven. JK was also able to ask questions to the opponent who joined the call. GF then addressed the tribunal are reiterated the points made above. He explained that the charge had knocked him for six and felt he was been blamed for something he had done previously. He strongly denied the accusation and remembers the incident in question very well. He added he was trying to slow down the ruck down. MD also added that he had heard a touchline discussion between the pair after the incident stating he heard the opponent say “I have got you now enjoy your time on the sidelines.” He also felt that the players arm is kept straight at all times in the tackle and does not change position.

DECISION:
Guilty

REASON FOR DECISION:
This is a serious allegation and we have given detailed consideration to all the evidence that has been put before us. On the one hand we have the evidence of Mr Bussey who gave a clear and articulate account of a deliberate and forceful grabbing of his testicles. Mr Kear makes has made a number of observations to the panel concerning his evidence – he observes that in his view he would expect Mr Bussey to have appeared to be in more pain; he would not have expected him to play on in the way that he did and the complaint that he made to be more forceful. Mr Kear submits that when you take those factors his evidence should not be relied upon. In addition Mr Kear points to the evidence of Mr Dunning the Assistant Coach – he gave evidence that Mr Bussey said on leaving the field – “I have got you now enjoy your time on the sidelines.” Mr Kear submits that you cannot rely on Bussey’s evidence and when you consider that the footage is inconclusive the case does not add up. We have also heard the evidence of Mr Flanagan who has given a vehement and impassioned denial of any wrongdoing – and ruled out any possibility of mistake on Mr Bussey’s part. In addition he makes the point that he has previously been accused of a similar allegation and accepted it at the outset the implication being that he would do so today were he to have done what is alleged. That previous matter has played no part in our consideration as to whether this case has been proved. Mr Kear submits you simply have word on word and from that the case cannot be proved. But to simply submit its word on word and the footage takes us nowhere is perhaps too simplistic an approach to the evidence. We were impressed with Mr Bussey’s account. He was in our view an honest witness who was trying to do his best to recall the incident. He made mention of a forceful grab of his testicles repeating more than once that you know when your testicles have been grabbed. Mr Flanaghan ruled out any contact whatsoever with Mr Bussey’s testicles saying that his hand is nowhere near them. Secondly, the footage that we have seen makes it clear that his reaction was immediate- as was the very complaint that he repeated before us today. He can be seen to be incensed; he can be heard to say he grabbed my knackers, he said himself that he had to watch his response as his on- field character is not the best so he can’t be going to hit anyone. If this did not happen it means that in that instance as a result of a totally innocuous and run of the mill tackle Mr Bussey formed the view to make up this allegation; an extremely serious allegation in order to get Mr Flanagan into trouble. There is no evidence that there is history between them. No reason has been suggested that why in that moment he would lie in that way. In addition he has come forward this evening to repeat these allegations which is not an easy course to take. The comment that he was heard to make after the incident when the two of them came off does not in our view undermine his account. We note that he was never given the opportunity to deal with that when questions were being asked of him but we are of the view that was likely inexperienced advocacy rather than anything else. Such comment if made in those terms is consistent with him reminding Mr Flanagan of the trouble he has got himself in. Finally the recording – it is inconclusive but it is consistent with the allegations that Mr Bussey makes it is clear that there is a second movement of the arm back beneath the body of Mr Bussey as he lays under Mr Flanagan consistent with him grabbing his testicles as alleged. Accordingly we are more than comfortably satisfied that this was a deliberate grabbing of the testicles and the allegation has been proved.

SUMMARY OF CM'S SUBMISSIONS ON THE APPROPRIATE SANCTION
• Player charged under RFL Rule 15.1(i) Behaves in any way contrary to the true spirit of the game – testicles - attacking • MRP reviewed an incident which took place in approx. 32nd minute • The incident was placed on report by the match referee • Attacker makes a break and is tackled around the waist by opponent • Opponent makes immediate complaint to the referee and confronts Mr Flanagan after the tackle • Player’s submissions reiterate the claim made at the time • In Referees report Mr Bussey states that Mr Flanagan has attacked his testicles • Footage does not show Mr Flanagan’s hand placed in the area however does show Mr Flanagan’s arm come away from the opponents body and then move back in towards the area • Graded F due to; - Charge starts at Grade F - Unnecessary and not part of the game - Clear intent due to the nature of the contact – could not be accidental - No place in the game for such acts - Brings the game into disrepute

SUMMARY OF PLAYER'S SUBMISSIONS ON THE APPROPRIATE SANCTION
JK reaffirmed the not guilty plea. He added that the player is 34 years of age and coming towards the end of his career.

AGGRAVATING FACTORS
08/08/19 – Attack to testicles – Grade F (8 matches) 27/06/19 – Trips – intentional trip – Grade C (2 matches) 17/01/19 – Dangerous Contact – Grade B (1 match)

REASONS FOR DECISION
The Tribunal thanks both sides for their submissions and compliments the player and his representatives on the way they conducted themselves during the hearing. However, the Tribunal are in agreement that this act is an intimate invasion and appears to be something that is creeping into the game. They therefore feel a suspension of 10 matches should be handed down along with the standard fine of £250.

SUSPENSION
10 matches

FINE
£250
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:37 pm  

Downbutnotout Stevo's Armpit

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:17 pm
Posts: 73
Cheers. Little or no doubt now.
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:05 pm  

Betsy Bulls wrote:
Betsy Bulls Free-scoring winger
Free-scoring winger

Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:00 am
Posts: 1827
Location: Mirfield
How is there little or no doubt? Still basically saying they believe one word over another, hardly proven beyond doubt!
Re: Flanagan Wed Mar 31, 2021 9:13 pm  

User avatarBullseye wrote:
Bullseye User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 12:04 pm
Posts: 30175
Location: The Corridor of Uncertainty
Seems as if they just chose to believe Bussey despite no clear evidence. Flanagan's previous record I feel must have counted against him.

Can't see an appeal being successful.
"If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them," - Wayne Bennett.
Re: Flanagan Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:42 am  

User avatarPumpetypump wrote:
Pumpetypump User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2002 12:55 pm
Posts: 7595
Location: LS9

It's beyond the pale for a player to go to that level of effort to try and get another player in trouble. It's also beyond the pale to attack someone's knackers. So basically either Bussey is a lying Sh1thouse, or Flanagan is a lying Sh1thouse!
Re: Flanagan Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:53 am  

User avatarBullseye wrote:
Bullseye User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 12:04 pm
Posts: 30175
Location: The Corridor of Uncertainty
Really reflects well on the game.
"If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them," - Wayne Bennett.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bulls2487, Bullsmad, childofthenorthern, Listenup94 and 98 guests

Quick Reply



Subject:
Message:

   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.

Return to Bradford Bulls - RedAmberandBlack.net


POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDTEAM
5,187,9371,41078,6789,567LOGIN
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
YOU HAVE RL CHAT OFF
RLFANS Match Centre
Mon 2nd Aug
NRL RND: 20 Canterbury6-34Gold Coast
NRL RND: 20 Cronulla22-40Manly
SL RND: 17 Castleford16-34Huddersfield
SL RND: 17 Hull FC10-42St.Helens
SL RND: 17 Hull KR16-23Catalans
Sun 1st Aug
NRL RND: 20 St.George14-50Souths
NRL RND: 20 Newcastle34-24Canberra
NRL RND: 20 Melbourne37-10Penrith
CH RND: 15 Dewsbury18-22Swinton
CH RND: 15 Featherstone6-23Toulouse
CH RND: 15 Halifax24-21Bradford
CH RND: 15 Newcastle14-20Whitehaven
CH RND: 15 Oldham20-30LondonB
CH RND: 15 Widnes16-34Batley
L1 RND: 12 Doncaster24-46Hunslet
L1 RND: 12 Crusaders72-4West Wales
L1 RND: 12 Rochdale20-42Keighley
SL RND: 17 Wigan50-6Leigh
SL RND: 17 Leeds26-27Warrington
Sat 31st Jul
L1 RND: 12 LondonS12-14Coventry
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2021 ROUND : 20
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Melbourne 19 689 224 465 34
Penrith 19 521 228 293 32
Souths 19 613 382 231 32
Parramatta 19 484 295 189 26
Sydney 19 509 343 166 26
Manly 19 569 400 169 24
Gold Coast 19 460 484 -24 16
Cronulla 19 392 458 -66 16
 
Canberra 19 383 465 -82 16
St.George 19 382 464 -82 16
Newcastle 19 325 472 -147 16
NZ Warriors 19 373 502 -129 12
Wests 19 412 564 -152 12
NQL Cowboys 19 358 584 -226 12
Brisbane 19 331 578 -247 10
Canterbury 19 242 600 -358 4
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVI ROUND : 17
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Catalans 16 482 262 220 30 183.97 93.75
St.Helens 13 328 106 222 22 309.43 84.62
Warrington 15 456 247 209 23 184.62 76.67
Wigan 17 305 295 10 22 103.39 64.71
Hull FC 14 308 279 29 15 110.39 53.57
Leeds 16 380 290 90 16 131.03 50
 
Hull KR 12 287 267 20 12 107.49 50
Castleford 15 267 388 -121 12 68.81 40
Huddersfield 16 278 334 -56 10 83.23 31.25
Salford 14 237 405 -168 8 58.52 28.57
Wakefield 16 279 394 -115 8 70.81 25
Leigh 14 218 558 -340 0 39.07 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2021 ROUND : 16
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Toulouse 10 456 94 362 20 485.11 100
Featherstone 14 579 189 390 24 306.35 92.86
Halifax 15 422 220 202 22 191.82 73.33
LondonB 14 404 357 47 17 113.17 67.86
Batley 15 404 302 102 20 133.77 66.67
Bradford 14 375 339 36 18 110.62 64.29
 
Whitehaven 15 297 410 -113 13 72.44 43.33
Widnes 14 323 378 -55 11 85.45 39.29
Sheffield 14 313 413 -100 11 75.79 39.29
Newcastle 14 298 420 -122 11 70.95 39.29
York 14 345 327 18 10 105.50 35.71
Dewsbury 14 215 401 -186 9 53.62 32.14
Oldham 14 210 500 -290 4 42 14.29
Swinton 15 256 547 -291 2 46.80 6.67
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2021 ROUND : 13
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Barrow 11 382 162 220 19 235.80 86.36
Workington 9 334 158 176 15 211.39 83.33
Doncaster 11 348 251 97 15 138.65 68.18
Crusaders 11 350 322 28 12 108.70 54.55
Keighley 12 410 279 131 13 146.95 54.17
Hunslet 12 334 301 33 11 110.96 45.83
 
Coventry 11 258 264 -6 10 97.73 45.45
Rochdale 11 299 322 -23 10 92.86 45.45
LondonS 12 192 350 -158 7 54.86 29.17
West Wales 12 126 586 -460 0 21.50 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Womens Super League 2021 ROUND : 9
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
LeedsW 7 364 38 326 14 957.89 100
St.HelensW 7 370 36 334 12 1,027.78 85.71
WiganW 6 222 64 158 10 346.88 83.33
YorkW 6 186 102 84 8 182.35 66.67
CastlefordW 6 166 96 70 8 172.92 66.67
BradfordW 8 158 264 -106 6 59.85 37.50
 
Hudds W 7 104 288 -184 4 36.11 28.57
Wire W 8 150 334 -184 4 44.91 25
FeatherstoneW 8 122 338 -216 4 36.09 25
WakefieldW 7 50 332 -282 0 15.06 0
RLFANS Recent Posts




X