Apparently on a grade F charge for attacking someone's nuts in a tackle AGAIN.
Time to rip up this guy's contract if he gets found guilty, bloody idiot.

Was this incident put on report during the Fev game?

I thought that's what happened when I watched the match but wasn't certain. I know it was put on report.

Yep. Happened in 32nd minute. You can watch it back on BBC iplayer you can clearly see GF hand move between the legs but it doesnt show if there was a grab or squeeze of anything. Giong to be hard to prove either way in my opinion. But as hes been charged it may prove difficult to over turn, especially given the incident in 2019.

After the last time....

[iJohn Kear doesn’t want George Flanagan to change.

The battle-hardened hooker is back in action this weekend after serving his lengthy ban.
Flanagan has not played since last August when he was suspended for attacking an opponent’s testicles.
But the 33-year-old returns to the fray in the Bulls’ Challenge Cup fourth-round clash with amateurs Underbank Rangers.
And Kear said: “The reason we signed George Flanagan is because we want him to be George Flanagan.”[/i

Well he knows what he's like but this latest incident goes beyond the pale.

String him up by them for 10 matches .

On the pitch he instantly denies the accusation so hopefully if there was contact it was purely accidental. Staggering however if the allegation is correct, I thought he was fortunate to be offered a new contract, after the Toronto incident that if I remember followed quickly from a ban for a sliding tackle (Swinton?).

Suspended for 10 matches and fined £250.

Looks like Berry will have to step up. We can't have an out of position HB and hooker as well and playing Doyle 80 minutes will kill him at this stage of his development.

Think he's very lucky it's only 10 considering he did it so soon after his last ban for the same incident.

I mean does he have a problem or something?

If he was like a really aggressive defender and kept getting pinged for high shots you sort of see why but grabbing another blokes cock and balls?

For someone in his 30s he strikes me as strangely immature. It's a hard enough game without that sort of grubby behaviour and it puts us in a really crap position now with Hallas out. We looked aimless enough against Feath without adding in makeshift or developing hookers in to the mix.

The bloke is a liability and has dropped us right in it.

Id be getting another 9 signed and George wouldnt be playing for me again if i was in charge.

What price a Mattie Wildie return on loan.? Nathan Peats has just arrived and Hood is the skipper so hes 3rd choice at best and wont be getting a game at Leigh.

I imagine Kear is looking at bringing someone in but at the moment it leaves us with Doyle who although very promising is still very inexperienced. Cameron Berry will be backup but I bet Kear wasn't planning on relying on him right now.

I won't dwell on Flanagan but the fact that Kear attended the hearing and it lasted 3 hours suggests he thought Flanagan had a case for defence. All academic now though...

Guess there must have been some medical evidence offrred eg bruising. As looked very inconclusive on the stream.

Jesus

Disappointed in Kear for sticking with this idiot for as long as he has. He should never have been given his most recent contract. In fact I'd have probably got rid straight after that incident where he messed a try up by celebrating before grounding the ball a few years ago.

Once again he has let the Club and his team mates down and through his silly actions has made life difficult for JK.Time to pay the full price and get rid.

In basic terms, to warrant keeping your contract after being banned 18 games in two seasons, you'd have to be an utter world beater when you eventually get on the field. But as mentioned above its complicated by the fact that JK appears to think he's innocent. If they are that sure they have to appeal.

Agreed Pumps, he's got nothing to lose but I can't see it going in his favour if he gets 10 games after a 3 hour discussion. Also his previous conduct weighs very heavily against him. If it was a first offence then you could perhaps claim it was an accident or a "one off". He's done this before and plenty of other things besides.

I don't want to start a "pile-on" with Flanagan but you do wonder about how much the club values the quality of discipline. For us to become reliant on someone so inherently unreliable is very poor. It also sets an abysmal example to other young players that you can have as many brain farts as you like and you'll still get a new contract. Good as Flanagan can be he's not worth the hassle. He's had his discipline problems since he was a kid and he's getting worse. If we're serious about progressing as a club then players with his attitude can't be part of the team.

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.

Could we use Race as backup hooker off the bench. Not much difference between hookers and half backs nowadays.

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