Kane Evans @ The judiciary. Does he miss the elimination final?

[Gary Gutful]

At least Evans got charged for a real tackle, not a hair pull like that big mincer Burgess!

 

[parra pete]

The worst part of Evans being suspended, it opens the gate for Tepai to come back in...!!!!

 

[Bazal]

Thought is not evidence.

Neither are lies...

 

[crocodile]

Neither are lies...

That's fine if they are proven to be lies. They weren't and he has been convicted on a thought despite contrary evidence from the offended party. The line "What happens on the field should stay on the field" doesn't mean that it actually happened. It's a joke.

 

[Tooooks]

They don’t need to be proven to be lies. They make a judgement as to his credibility taking all evidence into account.

His credibility was rightly questioned, probably due to the following:
1) Video shows significant contact to the face. There’s no way he felt nothing. That is utterly ridiculous.
2) He indicated what happens on the field should stay on the field. Saying that indicates he doesn’t believe on field incidents should be punished.

Had he said yep I felt contact to the face but at no stage did he make contact with my eyes, that would’ve helped Young’s case in all likelihood.

 

[Bazal]

That's fine if they are proven to be lies. They weren't and he has been convicted on a thought despite contrary evidence from the offended party. The line "What happens on the field should stay on the field" doesn't mean that it actually happened. It's a joke.

So you're saying they should accept the part of his evidence where he denies the gouge without question, but disregard the part of his evidence where he demonstrates that his evidence might not be credible?

K.

 

[crocodile]

So you're saying they should accept the part of his evidence where he denies the gouge without question, but disregard the part of his evidence where he demonstrates that his evidence might not be credible?

K.

How is the evidence not credible. His belief does not mean he is telling fibs.

 

[TheRam]

You can argue that some accidents shouldn't happen, and more care should be taken, but in this case it wasn't even careless! Parker slipped and fell into his shoulder.

I would argue that the only reason that Evans even hit Parker in the head was due to Parker raising his left hand /arm into Evans's chest as he was falling. Therefore when Evens tried to tackle him and wrap his arms around Parker, Evans arm and shoulder were pushed and raised by hitting Parker's arm that was in the way, thus forcing Evans arm and shoulder to elevate and hit Parker in the head.

Yes people it was Parkers own fault that he got hit in the head. He should of been suspended for knocking himself out. In all seriousness watch the video and you will see that I am right. The front on shots show this very clearly. Video link below -

https://www.foxsports.com.au/video/league/nrl/eel-binned-for-ending-parker!745795

 

[Twizzle]

Well i’d like to say I’m surprised, they are just getting a penalty Bronco’s in early.

not as bad as skeepe's meltdown over Hudson Young's 8 weeks, apparently he didn't do anything wrong

 

[Bazal]

How is the evidence not credible. His belief does not mean he is telling fibs.

Whoosh

The dude made two statements, essentially.

"I didn't feel an eye gouge."

"I believe what happens on the field should stay on the field."

Pretty clear how the latter affects the former...

 

[emjaycee]

For me this is the money shot.
Clearly shows Parker is falling or at least angling his body in such a way that he is no longer upright. Also shows Evans right arm making contact with Parkers bicep and shoulder region before sliding up to end up making contact with Parkers head. Not sure how much Parker had to do with the end result but also not sure what Kane was supposed to do.

 

[Bazal]

For me this is the money shot.
Clearly shows Parker is falling or at least angling his body in such a way that he is no longer upright. Also shows Evans right arm making contact with Parkers bicep and shoulder region before sliding up to end up making contact with Parkers head. Not sure how much Parker had to do with the end result but also not sure what Kane was supposed to do.

View attachment 32932

It also clearly shows the point of Evans' shoulder hitting Parker in the jaw tbh. On the day I felt it was chest to head, but it's been pretty clear since that it wasn't.

His suspension isn't an issue, it's fair. What is the issue is guys like Burgess and JWH getting off for similar and perhaps worse shots.

 

[crocodile]

Whoosh

The dude made two statements, essentially.

"I didn't feel an eye gouge."

"I believe what happens on the field should stay on the field."

Pretty clear how the latter affects the former...

You don't seem to understand that just because of the belief of the second statement it in no way means that the first line is untrue. He may indeed have not felt a gouge but still adhere to his belief in the second. The two are not mutually exclusive.

In any case he didn't make the second statement, he was asked a yes or no answer by the chairman.

 

[Bazal]

You don't seem to understand that just because of the belief of the second statement it in no way means that the first line is untrue. He may indeed have not felt a gouge but still adhere to his belief in the second. The two are not mutually exclusive.

In any case he didn't make the second statement, he was asked a yes or no answer by the chairman.

And you fail to understand that the second statement casts doubt on the motive for making his first.

"I definitely didn't kill my ex...but f**k I hated that bitch."

In any case the point you're trying to argue about accepting part of his evidence and not the other is completely destroyed by the video footage. He got what he deserved for a clear and blatant thug act.

 

[eels_fan]

The worst thing was the NRL council/prosecutor said Evans went into the tackle with more force/intensity than what was required and if he hadn’t of done so the tackle wouldn’t have ended up high.

So basically they are saying that if you tackle hard, you’ll get suspended even if first point of contact isn’t the head.

So the answer is to play soft now.

Muppets. All of them.

 

[Eelogical]

One should never go in too hard at the first point of contact.

 

[Eelementary]

It also clearly shows the point of Evans' shoulder hitting Parker in the jaw tbh. On the day I felt it was chest to head, but it's been pretty clear since that it wasn't.

His suspension isn't an issue, it's fair. What is the issue is guys like Burgess and JWH getting off for similar and perhaps worse shots.

I agree.

Evans' hit probably deserved a suspension, but why didn't JWH, and Sam Burgess' hits?

The NRL is a joke.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

f**ken Legal Aids guy!!

 

[IFR33K]

I agree.

Evans' hit probably deserved a suspension, but why didn't JWH, and Sam Burgess' hits?

The NRL is a joke.

JWH’s tackle wasn’t much different to Kane’s tackle. Both attackers fell into the arm/shoulder.


How Burgess ever got off is a near miracle.

 

[crocodile]

And you fail to understand that the second statement casts doubt on the motive for making his first.

I understand completely. The two are not related. Anyone may have a firmly held belief about anything. It doesn't mean they tell lies.

"I definitely didn't kill my ex...but f**k I hated that bitch."

Irrelevant. Dead wives doesn't automatically dictate that somebody who doesn't like them is guilty.

In any case the point you're trying to argue about accepting part of his evidence and not the other is completely destroyed by the video footage. He got what he deserved for a clear and blatant thug act.

The video footage shows a hand near or on the face. It does not show fingers in the eye and the testimony of the offended party supports this. To my knowledge, nobody has ever been hauled before the judiciary on a charge of "Hands on face". He was charged with gouging an eye which has been denied by the accused as well as the offended party. His belief regarding on field behavior does not mean he lied.