Jump to content

George Flanagan


POR
 Share

Recommended Posts

kear as spoken on the alleged  incident which is suspected to have occurred in the 32nd minute of Bulls' 41-16 defeat in the Betfred Challenge Cup by Featherstone last Sunday.

I  have seen the incident on numerous occasions, and I am mystified," muted Kear who will join Flanagan at the tribunal on Tuesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Reffed him in the juniors, was a nasty, gobby piece of work even at 15 

  • Like 2

"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George Flanagan of Bradford Bulls has been suspended for 10 matches and fined £250 after being found guilty of attacking an opponent’s testicles. The Grade F incident occurred in the 32nd minute of the Bulls’ Challenge Cup Second Round tie with Featherstone Rovers on Sunday 21 March. Flanagan had pleaded not guilty.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, POR said:

George Flanagan of Bradford Bulls has been suspended for 10 matches and fined £250 after being found guilty of attacking an opponent’s testicles. The Grade F incident occurred in the 32nd minute of the Bulls’ Challenge Cup Second Round tie with Featherstone Rovers on Sunday 21 March. Flanagan had pleaded not guilty.  

That seems a ridiculously light punishment.

  • Like 3

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

That seems a ridiculously light punishment.

yep, its a little bit longer than his first offence almost to make a point but not really.. Even though it will probably equate to a larger proportion of the season as its been shortened thats not really the point. I would have given him a 12 -18 month ban.. time rather than matches which i think is important, plus probably long enough to make him seriously think about his career at the age of 34.. 

but depends what is laid out in the grading book for offences i suppose!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RP London said:

yep, its a little bit longer than his first offence almost to make a point but not really.. Even though it will probably equate to a larger proportion of the season as its been shortened thats not really the point. I would have given him a 12 -18 month ban.. time rather than matches which i think is important, plus probably long enough to make him seriously think about his career at the age of 34.. 

but depends what is laid out in the grading book for offences i suppose!

The grading indicated an 8 match ban as minimum if found guilty

10 matches for a second offence of this magnitude is woefully lenient

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 To be fair he did well for us at batley,coming off the bench games changed for sure, BUT, when you think  that one of our players got a 2 year ban for putting a fiver on us winning a game a rugby, have seen players thumped from behind and ended up with a broken jaw and only 10 game ban handed out.Not that long ago we had a club director call our winger a BB and what were done.nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LeeF said:

The grading indicated an 8 match ban as minimum if found guilty

10 matches for a second offence of this magnitude is woefully lenient

they often also have a maximum, do you know if it did?

totally agree it is woefully lenient but just wondering if there is a reason for it (ie they cannot go outside of this boundary) rather than just jumpng on the usual incompetency excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just had a look and Grade F is 8+ in the range.. so they could have done whatever they like... 10 games is a cop out. 

at 34 they could have basically forced his retirement and I dont think that would have been the wrong thing to do. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RP London said:

they often also have a maximum, do you know if it did?

totally agree it is woefully lenient but just wondering if there is a reason for it (ie they cannot go outside of this boundary) rather than just jumpng on the usual incompetency excuse.

No maximum for this grading

Also the Committee can go outside the range for any grading

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, silverback said:

 To be fair he did well for us at batley,coming off the bench games changed for sure, BUT, when you think  that one of our players got a 2 year ban for putting a fiver on us winning a game a rugby, have seen players thumped from behind and ended up with a broken jaw and only 10 game ban handed out.Not that long ago we had a club director call our winger a BB and what were done.nothing.

This. Its grubby what he did but people calling for longer bans come on.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, POR said:

George Flanagan of Bradford Bulls has been suspended for 10 matches and fined £250 after being found guilty of attacking an opponent’s testicles. The Grade F incident occurred in the 32nd minute of the Bulls’ Challenge Cup Second Round tie with Featherstone Rovers on Sunday 21 March. Flanagan had pleaded not guilty.  

He should have been suspended for the rest of the season

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Is the footage available anywhere? I’ve not seen anything from this so it’s hard to make a judgement. 

I've only seen what was on the red button on the BBC 2weeks ago. And that didn't show anything really. I would assume one or other of the clubs would have different footage. But it still took about 3hours of deliberation to come to a decision. I think there will be enough "leeway" in the original decision to allow an appeal. Is the decision usually released on the Thursday after? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robin Evans said:

Kind of my sentiments.

He's a Richard of a bloke and a grub of a player.... but some are calling for sine die????

So what, just shrug of someone twice doing something that could cause life changing injuries to a player? To do it once was stupid and disgraceful,  to then do it again knowing the damage it could cause is unforgivable and he should not be allowed to possibly do it again.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dkw said:

So what, just shrug of someone twice doing something that could cause life changing injuries to a player? To do it once was stupid and disgraceful,  to then do it again knowing the damage it could cause is unforgivable and he should not be allowed to possibly do it again.

Then we disagree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...