Father ‘banned for almost half a year’ for screaming ‘you’re a f****** BOY’ at girl in under-12s rugby match in Surrey after ‘transgender rumours’
A father has reportedly been slapped with an 18-week touchline ban after allegedly shouting ‘you’re a f****** boy’ at a girl in a under-12s rugby match after hearing rumours she was transgender.
Graham Hall, 45, entered the field of play and screamed abuse at the girl after she made a tackle on his daughter in a Surrey Cup match in January.
The girl left the pitch in tears and her father fronted up to Hall, who restated that he believed the girl was a boy before the pair started to clash and had to be separated.
Despite having felt ‘scared and panicked’ and struggling to breathe, the girl returned to action and apologised to Hall’s daughter, who she had fallen on and caused to scream.
According to The Telegraph, Hall’s rant was as follows: ‘You’re a f****** boy and shouldn’t be playing in a girls’ side… you are clearly not a girl and look what you’ve done.
‘That was f****** unnecessary, why would you do that?’
A man has been given an 18-week touchline ban after accusing a girl of being transgender in an under-12s rugby match (stock image used)
The girl left the pitch feeling ‘scared and panicked’ and her father confronted the man, who later apologised
Hall’s daughter had told her opponent that it was okay and ‘not her fault’.
The abused girl said: ‘I love playing rugby for the Cobham team and we have got really good team spirit and look after each other through every moment. We always have loads of fun, and I am happiest when playing rugby.’
After the match, Hall, whose daughter plays for Rosslyn Park, asked the RFU about transgender regulations.
Due to the rumours, Rosslyn Park had asked Cobham before the game if they were fielding any boys, which their opponents denied.
Hall did later apologise, but, while giving evidence, contested the lawfulness of the tackle and denied swearing at the girl.
The disciplinary panel said that his view of the girl was based ‘on wholly unsubstantiated rumour and conjecture that was factually wrong’.
His conduct was described as ‘disgraceful’ and under Rule 5.12 – conduct prejudicial to the interests of the union and the game – he was given a ban of 24 weeks before that was reduced to 18.
His ‘acceptance of some misconduct and his previous good disciplinary record’ means they were willing to reduce the punishment. He also had to pay £125 in costs and has until April 8 to lodge an appeal.
