Hudson Young suspended for eight weeks

All the news on the Canberra Raiders NRL team, all in one place

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41997
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Botman »

T_R wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:27 pm Very hard to claim an eye gouge when the 'victim' denies it.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Just like it's hard to claim domestic violance if the 'victim' denies it.
Just like it's hard to claim organised gang violance if the 'victim' denies it.

Except in this case, there is video evidence. The 'victim' can say what he likes, especially when he's clearly stated he's not about that snitching life... the evidence presented will overcome that.
User avatar
Mickey_Raider
Jason Croker
Posts: 4340
Joined: March 16, 2008, 7:15 am
Favourite Player: Big Papa
Location: North Sydney

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Mickey_Raider »

GreenMachine wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:50 pm Kangaroo court 100%
In b4 Rickman stomps in here aggressively attacking you or anyone else for insinuating the nrl and it’s constituent organs are incompetent or biased or both.
Up The Milk
User avatar
simo
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9574
Joined: March 12, 2013, 7:50 pm
Favourite Player: Keghead

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by simo »

greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:47 pm And now the Judiciary chair is instructucting the panel to consider if Pompey’s evidence is “influenced” by his view that what happens on the field should stay on the field.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/10/jud ... ng--evans/
Is the judiciary chair allowed to steer a panels thought process that way?
Dont delete this GE
Billy Walker
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12395
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Billy Walker »

He gets off for sure - common sense will prevail here
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 51011
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by The Nickman »

Azza wrote:He'll get time, 100%. And deserves it. The question is the length.
That’s how I feel too.
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 51011
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by The Nickman »

Mickey_Raider wrote:
GreenMachine wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:50 pm Kangaroo court 100%
In b4 Rickman stomps in here aggressively attacking you or anyone else for insinuating the nrl and it’s constituent organs are incompetent or biased or both.
Yeah... good one.
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 145095
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by greeneyed »

@timrobinsonfox on Twitter

Deliberating: A very interesting defence for @RaidersCanberra Hudson Young. Judiciary has to go against his word, @NZWarriors Adam Pompey’s word and his on field reaction, which was proven by QC Nick Ghabar to be none. Great case. @FOXSportsNews #NRL  #NRLFinals #judiciary

Deliberations started at 9:00pm.
Image
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 145095
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by greeneyed »

simo wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:56 pm
greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:47 pm And now the Judiciary chair is instructucting the panel to consider if Pompey’s evidence is “influenced” by his view that what happens on the field should stay on the field.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/10/jud ... ng--evans/
Is the judiciary chair allowed to steer a panels thought process that way?
Seems to be.
Image
User avatar
Kryptonite
John Ferguson
Posts: 2483
Joined: June 4, 2012, 8:27 am
Favourite Player: Terry Reagan
Location: Brisbane

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Kryptonite »

So he gets off and what has he learned? That if you have the best defence brief you will get away with it and il bet if he does get off he will do it again!
He needs 10 weeks and a very long stint in Mounties next year to think about it
User avatar
GreenMachine
Jason Croker
Posts: 4264
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by GreenMachine »

Steering them to guilty verdict so that the MRC can save face.
edwahu

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by edwahu »

simo wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:56 pm
greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:47 pm And now the Judiciary chair is instructucting the panel to consider if Pompey’s evidence is “influenced” by his view that what happens on the field should stay on the field.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/10/jud ... ng--evans/
Is the judiciary chair allowed to steer a panels thought process that way?
Yeah, he is just reminding them of a direction that is already in the rules.

https://www.qrl.com.au/siteassets/docum ... dition.pdf

That's why I would question whether he also reminded them of the direction given that video footage can be deceptive, since the whole case is based on it.
Last edited by edwahu on September 10, 2019, 9:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
simo
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9574
Joined: March 12, 2013, 7:50 pm
Favourite Player: Keghead

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by simo »

greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:58 pm
simo wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:56 pm
greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:47 pm And now the Judiciary chair is instructucting the panel to consider if Pompey’s evidence is “influenced” by his view that what happens on the field should stay on the field.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/10/jud ... ng--evans/
Is the judiciary chair allowed to steer a panels thought process that way?
Seems to be.
What a strangely leading thing for someone who is supposed to be impartial to say.
Dont delete this GE
cat
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12444
Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
Location: Sydney

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by cat »

GreenMachine wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:48 pm You can clearly see this is heading towards a guilty result.
The fact that the panel are reminded to consider Adam Pompey’s evidence as possibly corrupted by a sense of player loyalty is ridiculous.
What about the fact there was no reaction from Pompey directly after the incident?
I am gobsmacked that he has done that, he is pretty much implying Pompey wasnt telling the truth which is firstly incorrect as his actions on the field matches his testimony and secondly thats getting close to defamation- implying Pompey is lying

its also showing how for a multi million dollar sport its pretty amateurish and EDIT
Vaccinated
User avatar
GreenMachine
Jason Croker
Posts: 4264
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by GreenMachine »

simo wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:01 pm
greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:58 pm
simo wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:56 pm
greeneyed wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:47 pm And now the Judiciary chair is instructucting the panel to consider if Pompey’s evidence is “influenced” by his view that what happens on the field should stay on the field.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/10/jud ... ng--evans/
Is the judiciary chair allowed to steer a panels thought process that way?
Seems to be.
What a strangely leading thing for someone who is supposed to be impartial to say.
Agree.
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 51011
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by The Nickman »

GreenMachine wrote:Steering them to guilty verdict so that the MRC can save face.
You know they don’t do that, right?

The judiciary overrules the MRC all the time
User avatar
GreenMachine
Jason Croker
Posts: 4264
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by GreenMachine »

I couldn’t be prouder of our club for fighting this no matter the result.

I’m embarrassed by the lack of professionalism in the NRL.

From the standard of referee, to the MRC and now this joke of a ‘Court’ process.

I guess when players behave in an unprofessional manner over the offseason, we should remember the system they’re working with.
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by T_R »

edwahu wrote:You can't really commit perjury as it's not a real court. At least you can't be punished for it.
'An act of deceit'

'Performing a false warrant'

'Mala fide'

Whatever. We're talking inter rusticos.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk


Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
cat
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12444
Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
Location: Sydney

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by cat »

Kryptonite wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:00 pm So he gets off and what has he learned? That if you have the best defence brief you will get away with it and il bet if he does get off he will do it again!
He needs 10 weeks and a very long stint in Mounties next year to think about it
no matter the verdict tonight I am certain Ricky and Hudson will be having a very unpleasant conversation and Ricky will be laying down the law in no uncertain terms. Hudson will have a lot of work to do before he is back in first grade
Vaccinated
User avatar
GreenMachine
Jason Croker
Posts: 4264
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by GreenMachine »

cat wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:06 pm
Kryptonite wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:00 pm So he gets off and what has he learned? That if you have the best defence brief you will get away with it and il bet if he does get off he will do it again!
He needs 10 weeks and a very long stint in Mounties next year to think about it
no matter the verdict tonight I am certain Ricky and Hudson will be having a very unpleasant conversation and Ricky will be laying down the law in no uncertain terms. Hudson will have a lot of work to do before he is back in first grade
I have more faith in Ricky reforming Hudson, than the NRL ever achieving the same with this joke of a process.
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 51011
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by The Nickman »

T_R wrote:
edwahu wrote:You can't really commit perjury as it's not a real court. At least you can't be punished for it.
'An act of deceit'

'Performing a false warrant'

Whatever. We're talking inter rusticos.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
You think you’re so much smarter than the rest of us with your fancy words and book learning, don’t you?
Raidersteve
Noa Nadruku
Posts: 162
Joined: March 12, 2008, 4:59 pm

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Raidersteve »

PigRickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:55 pm
T_R wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:27 pm Very hard to claim an eye gouge when the 'victim' denies it.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Just like it's hard to claim domestic violance if the 'victim' denies it.
Just like it's hard to claim organised gang violance if the 'victim' denies it.

Except in this case, there is video evidence. The 'victim' can say what he likes, especially when he's clearly stated he's not about that snitching life... the evidence presented will overcome that.
Is that the same video evidence that showed no reaction from the player at all. Even the hardest of people react to being poked in the eye that is why it is taught as a self defense target because the eye just can't handle that kind of contact. Yet there was no reaction how is it possible.
Last edited by Raidersteve on September 10, 2019, 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Azza
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10526
Joined: February 16, 2005, 10:12 am

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Azza »

The Rickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:09 pm
T_R wrote:
edwahu wrote:You can't really commit perjury as it's not a real court. At least you can't be punished for it.
'An act of deceit'

'Performing a false warrant'

Whatever. We're talking inter rusticos.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
You think you’re so much smarter than the rest of us with your fancy words and book learning, don’t you?
I've done an LLB with honours and I think it means gastric problems and flatulence when you've had too much Mexican.
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 51011
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by The Nickman »

Azza wrote:
The Rickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:09 pm
T_R wrote:
edwahu wrote:You can't really commit perjury as it's not a real court. At least you can't be punished for it.
'An act of deceit'

'Performing a false warrant'

Whatever. We're talking inter rusticos.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
You think you’re so much smarter than the rest of us with your fancy words and book learning, don’t you?
I've done an LLB with honours and I think it means gastric problems and flatulence when you've had too much Mexican.
Well, he’s sure got my number!
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41997
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Botman »

Raidersteve wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:10 pm
PigRickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:55 pm
T_R wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:27 pm Very hard to claim an eye gouge when the 'victim' denies it.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Just like it's hard to claim domestic violance if the 'victim' denies it.
Just like it's hard to claim organised gang violance if the 'victim' denies it.

Except in this case, there is video evidence. The 'victim' can say what he likes, especially when he's clearly stated he's not about that snitching life... the evidence presented will overcome that.
Is that the same video evidence that showed no reaction from the player at all. Even the hardest of people react to being poked in the eye that is why it is taught as a self defense target because the eye just can't handle that kind of contact. Yet there was no reaction how is it possible.
Attempted murder is still a pretty serious **** charge, friend. You dont just get to walk for a serious crime just because you couldnt get the job done. He'll suffer for his intent, and eye gouging is as serious a charge as can be levelled on a footy field, or attempted eye gouging as it may be. And i really dont think the player who said he's not about snitching is going to hold much sway with his testimony haha. But this is a kangaroo court to be sure and certain, anything is possible
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by T_R »

Azza wrote:
The Rickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:09 pm
T_R wrote:
edwahu wrote:You can't really commit perjury as it's not a real court. At least you can't be punished for it.
'An act of deceit'

'Performing a false warrant'

Whatever. We're talking inter rusticos.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
You think you’re so much smarter than the rest of us with your fancy words and book learning, don’t you?
I've done an LLB with honours and I think it means gastric problems and flatulence when you've had too much Mexican.
I went back and edited because I finally remembered the one that I originally meant to post.



Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 145095
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by greeneyed »

Canberra Raiders forward Hudson Young learns fate at NRL judiciary for eye gouge on Adam Pompey

Hudson Young's NRL finals hopes are in tatters after the Canberra Raiders rookie was found guilty of an eye gouge for the second time this season.

Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14280

@BulldogRitchie on Twitter

Hudson Young guilty

@dan_walsh64 on Twitter

Breaking: @RaidersCanberra Hudson Young found guilty of dangerous contact with eyes of Warrior Adam Pompey. Suspension now to be determined by judiciary @NRLcom

Decision handed down at 9:18pm
Image
kona_dream
Clinton Schifcofske
Posts: 572
Joined: May 13, 2010, 2:31 pm
Favourite Player: Jarrod Croker

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by kona_dream »

Danaman137
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1264
Joined: February 29, 2016, 8:09 pm
Favourite Player: Clinton Schifcofske
Location: Canberra

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Danaman137 »

Rip


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
GreenMachine
Jason Croker
Posts: 4264
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by GreenMachine »

Guilty
User avatar
Raider47
Jason Croker
Posts: 4751
Joined: April 15, 2009, 10:38 am
Favourite Player: Matt Timoko
Location: Queanbo

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Raider47 »

What a weird situation.
Danaman137
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1264
Joined: February 29, 2016, 8:09 pm
Favourite Player: Clinton Schifcofske
Location: Canberra

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Danaman137 »

Hard to argue


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Raidersteve
Noa Nadruku
Posts: 162
Joined: March 12, 2008, 4:59 pm

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Raidersteve »

PigRickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:14 pm
Raidersteve wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:10 pm
PigRickman wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:55 pm
T_R wrote: September 10, 2019, 8:27 pm Very hard to claim an eye gouge when the 'victim' denies it.

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Just like it's hard to claim domestic violance if the 'victim' denies it.
Just like it's hard to claim organised gang violance if the 'victim' denies it.

Except in this case, there is video evidence. The 'victim' can say what he likes, especially when he's clearly stated he's not about that snitching life... the evidence presented will overcome that.
Is that the same video evidence that showed no reaction from the player at all. Even the hardest of people react to being poked in the eye that is why it is taught as a self defense target because the eye just can't handle that kind of contact. Yet there was no reaction how is it possible.
Attempted murder is still a pretty serious **** charge, friend. You dont just get to walk for a serious crime just because you couldnt get the job done. He'll suffer for his intent, and eye gouging is as serious a charge as can be levelled on a footy field, or attempted eye gouging as it may be. And i really dont think the player who said he's not about snitching is going to hold much sway with his testimony haha. But this is a kangaroo court to be sure and certain, anything is possible
So you are trying to suggest that his sole intention in that tackle was all about attacking the eyes rather than trying to stop a try being scored by trying to get under the player to hold him up.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41997
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Botman »

Danaman137 wrote: September 10, 2019, 9:20 pm Hard to argue


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You're about to be surprised, friend. The GH stands ready to argue vigorously
Billy Walker
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12395
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by Billy Walker »

That’s a croc! How can you be found guilty of making contact to the eyes when the person you contacted says you didn’t. Attempted contact maybe but they have said Pompey is a liar!
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Hudson Young referred straight to judiciary

Post by T_R »

I wonder if Pompey is offended by being called a liar

Sent from my SM-G975F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Post Reply