Just remembering the ridiculous 5 match ban Anakin got for a "dangerous" throw against a fully conscious opponent. What will Ben Flower get for his punch thrown against an unconscious O'hia flat out on the ground with no chance of defending himself?
For me forget the "tariff" garbage this goes beyond anything I've seen - must be at the least 12 games. He should have been arrested as he walked off the pitch.

He should spend next season out of the game and if there's any shred of decency on the Wigan BoD, he'd be sacked with immediate effect; in a few seconds of lunacy, he's dragged the reputation of RL back by decades and created more negative publicity than all the other shenanigans that have taken place this year.

Agreed. First punch - can happen and is a straight red - punching a fella who is on the ground unconscious is beyond belief. At lease a season out would be the minimum for me but I wondered what people thought would be the length of ban dished out by the RFL.

On TotalRL it gives his apology. Hope he doesn't think that will get him a lower ban. Should be out for a long time.

If taking performance enhancing drugs has ban of two years, then Flower should be banned triple that. Though I despair some of the comments on the VT thread, mainly by Leeds fans. "I hope he gets depression" is taking it too far.

6-8 matches for me.

8+ for me. First punch would have probably seen him cop a two match ban as it is but the second, for punching someone isn't able to even see straight never mind defend themselves, deserves the highest form of punishment.

If it was me I'd go 12 game domestic ban not including friendlies or internationals plus a £1,000 fine.

Ok it's clearly bad but let's not go over the top.
8 matches. Maybe a bit more. But no life ban. No dropping by club. No arrest.....especially as LH is ok with it.

Should be a minimum of 8 matches, but given his apology and the fact he plays for Wigan. I wouldn't expect any more than 3 matches.

@Chrisirvine: Gtr Manchester Police on Ben Flower: "We will b liaising with RFL St Helens & CPS before a decision is made on course of action to b taken."

I think this is totally ott whatever happens during a sport should be dealt by the governing body or it could set a presidence, it may lead to players even pulling out of tackles if unsure

But the RFL should be tuff on him as it was our number one occasion and all people will talk about is this incident, so you might add bringing game into disrepute?

It won't lead to players pulling out of tackles because

A) what happened with Hohaia wasn't a tackle
B) what player is going to think "I'm gonna knock that guy out, and when he's down I'm gonna punch him some more". There really shouldn't be a question of being unsure. If a player does what Flower did, it would be intent p, knowing its wrong anyway.


I'm glad the police are getting involved because what would've happened had Hohaia sustained a severe head injury? Extreme cases like these needs to be taken care of with extreme measures in order to warn players about future conduct.

The police get involved with the ameteur game the bottom line is this went beyond biff if that was on Westgate he could be going to gaol for that. You only have to see the negative publicity this has brought to the game. Disgraceful and an apology is little in return for the damage and reputation of him his club and if the RL don't have a backbone the game too.

Unfortunately for Flower this has caught the eye of the wider public and media, as a result the RFL will have to be harsh in order to send the message that this is not a normal occurance and is unacceptable in our game.

It doesn't help when you get nuggets like Jonathan Davies making statements during commentary such as "Hohaia started it and Ben Flower finished it!".
Or Martin Offiah saying "if you attack a prop forward enforcer then that's what you can expect"

Wonder if Flower gave a drugs test after the match, he lost it very quickly....

The problem for Flower is that in most cases it is hard to judge intent.
In this case he hit him in retaliation and it was a sweet hit so knocked him out.
You know if you connect well with a punch.
He then stood over him looked right in his eyes and hit him again. The camera could see what he saw so there is no doubt that Flower should have known he was defenceless.
There was plenty of time to pull out, he chose not to.
That will be what hurts him when judgement comes.

Didn't a football player get jail for an assault during a match a few years ago ???
Flower seemed to me to deliberately go to break ohia's nose
That amounts to GBH !!
So Mr Flower may well get a court appearance to his name

Duncan Fergison for head butting playing for Rangers about 15 years ago. Hope the police don't get involved as it sets a president and every week we will have fans citing opposition players to be arrested and sent down.

Hohaia doesn't look to be pressing charges and just because it is on telly doesn't make it GBH.

If you want I can give a proper legal analysis of the potential for charges, just for clarity, but please note that I am expressing no opinion as to what or should happen.

Firstly, it is unlikely to be grievous bodily harm, unless it transpires there is a fracture. It is, if anything, actual bodily harm (the charge below grievous bodily harm) based on the unconsciousness. But this is where it gets murky, because to charge that you'd need to prosecute based upon the whole incident, as the act that causes the actual bodily harm (the unconsciousness) is the first punch, but that is all part of the rough and tumble of rugby league. So could you prosecute based on just the second punch? No, because you can't subdivide like that. You can't say, "we'll ignore the punch where he knocks a man out but prosecute him for the punch where there is no proof of injury". If you did that, you could only really charge a common assault, because the sickening punch has seemingly caused no injury.

That is all for someone else at a different desk, but what can be taken into account is the context (a physical sport) and the alternative punishments available, as well as the views of the victim. For example, someone might say that there is enough evidence to prosecute but the public interest doesn't demand it, as:
1. the most physically damaging act was part of what happens in sports like rugby league, and that the players consent to that risk
2. the player has been punished significantly by the ruling body and his employers, and that the courts will add little to that.

Equally, someone might say that there is enough evidence to prosecute and that despite all other factors, the incident was so serious that only prosecution could be justified, that if on a high street it could well attract a prison sentence.

Quote ="REDWHITEANDBLUE"The police get involved with the ameteur game the bottom line is this went beyond biff if that was on Westgate he could be going to gaol for that. You only have to see the negative publicity this has brought to the game. Disgraceful and an apology is little in return for the damage and reputation of him his club and if the RL don't have a backbone the game too.'" www.bristolpost.co.uk/Keynsham-R ... story.html

Quote ="REDWHITEANDBLUE"The police get involved with the ameteur game the bottom line is this went beyond biff if that was on Westgate he could be going to gaol for that. You only have to see the negative publicity this has brought to the game. Disgraceful and an apology is little in return for the damage and reputation of him his club and if the RL don't have a backbone the game too.'" www.bristolpost.co.uk/Keynsham-R ... story.html

Where Flower has got problems is that the harsher the RFL are on him, the less likely that a prosecution would follow (i.e., the effect of his actions on himself can be a factor to consider), so the RFL are likely to go to town on him. To see a player in court would tarnish the name of rugby league, that is without question, so they are going to be tough if they think it will lessen that risk, particularly if leniency is a factor in taking the matter to court. Flower will be made an example of, without question. If I was in charge of the RFL, I would be hellbent on keeping it in-house, to protect the game, so I would make the punishment long and hard. The last thing you would want is a player in court because you have been seen to be weak.

12 matches and a large fine, with Flower doing some community work or talking in schools about the effects of not thinking first and reacting violently.

Pure conjecture, but if it did go to court, I wonder what they'd make of Shaun Wane's 'inspiring' team talk on the WCC documentary, where he incites his players to "knock em out," and "get reckless?" <swearing removed but you can work out for yourselves where it goes>

For me, this should be the catalyst that forces the RFL to take control of the game back from unscrupulous coaches like Wane, and Maguire before him; the brand of RL they advocate is ugly, vicious and unedifying; and because it's been allowed to go largely unchecked, it's culminated in RL's showcase event being marred by an act of thuggery that has, quite rightly, created a storm of negative publicity that will cause serious damage to our reputation.

Nothing to do with the RFL if GMP decide its in the public interest then he may get arrested or interviewed not under arrest a file will be submitted to the CPS to decide. On the assault this is made out however there is also public order offences to consider especially affray if you look up the definition you will see it fits the incident.

Agreed -12 games. Can't condone that second punch.

First one is the best punch I've seen on a RL pitch. That would warrant a SO and 3-4 game ban on its own, but it was impressive!