Player Discussion Paul Byron

[Chippy11]

So his next game will be February 2nd!
He will be well rested on mostly rusted!

 

[A55P2]

Give Hudon the three games. He deserves it based on last year peformance. Plus, we're playing well and Byron hasn't been that much of a factor in the last few games, even though he played well.

 

[Habaneros]

Renaud Lavoie‏ @renlavoietva 3h3 hours ago
Paul Byron suspension breakdown is 2 games for charging on Weegar + 1 game because the @FlaPanthers player is injured for a total of 3 games.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Not a superstar so throw the book at him

 

[Habs]

How do you prove intent unless you create a tribunal of some sort vested with similar procedural standards as those in typical courts of law and appoint individuals who are uniquely qualified to prove intent with a credible standard of evidence?

There is no time to convene and hold hearings and review evidence and then arrive at a decision without causing countless delays.

What does the NHL do -- they appoint ex-goons and face-punchers to review film, conduct an interview with the perpetrator usually by phone and render a decision typically within 24 hours.

I think the dichotomy is not intent vs. outcome but rather condemning an action vs. condemning the consequences of an action.

Sportsnet's account shows how the NHL is not making any distinction between an action and the consequences of an action -- it is taking both into account:

“Byron launches himself excessively upwards, coming off the ice to deliver the hit, and in the process makes significant and forceful head contact,” read the statement in DoPS’ video explanation for its ruling late on Wednesday. “The onus is on Byron not to elevate excessively and launch into the hit. Regardless of Weegar’s movement, there is no reason why the shoulder of Byron should be making direct and forceful contact with Weegar’s head.”

That on its own was worth a couple of games, and Weegar being injured justified the number going to three. Now, Byron and the Canadiens are just going to have to live with the consequences of his actions.

On the same action, if Weegar were say taken out for the season, would it be justified to have Byron suspended longer?

People launch themselves excessively every game, without penalty. If nobody is hurt, there is no suspension. Knee on knee happens often, zero suspension unless there is an injury. Punch someone in the head, its all good. Hit from behind? No problem. 2" Vertical? 3 games.

Chara should have had a lifetime suspension after his hit on Max, he's still making millions out there. The entire way the league handles suspensions is a pile of shit, we know it depends if the player is injured, for the most part. Its inconsistent and player safety is ignored on a nightly basis in the NHL. I'm not saying you are incorrect, but suspensions can be handed out on a nightly basis in this league.

 

[sandviper]

I didn’t think that hit was suspension worthy but understand player safety has to draw the line somewhere. My issue though is they are really inconsistent and all over the place with it.

Meanwhile, Wilson did this late last year:



So sure, suspend Byron, but despite Wilson’s history, he got no discipline for that.

 

[Runner77]

People launch themselves excessively every game, without penalty. If nobody is hurt, there is no suspension. Knee on knee happens often, zero suspension unless there is an injury. Punch someone in the head, its all good. Hit from behind? No problem. 2" Vertical? 3 games.

Chara should have had a lifetime suspension after his hit on Max, he's still making millions out there. The entire way the league handles suspensions is a pile of ****, we know it depends if the player is injured, for the most part. Its inconsistent and player safety is ignored on a nightly basis in the NHL. I'm not saying you are incorrect, but suspensions can be handed out on a nightly basis in this league.

If they're giving weight to the consequences of an action (i.e. injury), then you get into the slippery slope of the recipient's predisposition to be injured. Same action on two different players or more as you correctly mention, can have completely different consequences. Which is why in my opinion they should just suspend on the basis of an action and not the consequences of an action.

If you happen to hit a more brittle player who instead of being absent for one game is unable to play for the rest of the season, how should your suspension be longer on account of this?

 

[Habs]

If they're giving weight to the consequences of an action (i.e. injury), then you get into the slippery slope of the recipient's predisposition to be injured. Same action on two different players or more as you correctly mention, can have completely different consequences. Which is why in my opinion they should just suspend on the basis of an action and not the consequences of an action.

If you happen to hit a more brittle player who instead of being absent for one game is unable to play for the rest of the season, how should your suspension be longer on account of this?

Yes I agree intent should be the only factor involved, but it never is.

 

[Max2]

"Byron hasn't been that much of a factor in the last few games, even though he played well.".....so doesn't playing well mean he's been a factor? lol Did you see that shorthanded Bruins goal for example? He's been one of the best players recently.

 

[THE HOFF]

Yes I agree intent should be the only factor involved, but it never is.

I'd personally suspend players on intent even if there is no harm done.

If a guy waves his stick trying to hit someone in the face and misses, i'd still pull him out for a few games.

In a sport where clean hard hits and fighting are tolerated, players have enough tools to take justice into their own hands without being cowards.

 

[Runner77]

Yes I agree intent should be the only factor involved, but it never is.

You can't prove intent with the set up the NHL is using. They should just focus on punishing actions, not the consequence of actions. The latter is more of the ambit of the judicial system.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

Didn't expect 3 but whatever. I don't think he meant to hurt the guy and it was kind of a fluke but no tolerance is okay for me. I hope its more consistent and I hope Weegar is okay.

 

[waffledave]

I thought it was a clear cut dirty, reckless and suspendable hit. Really no debate whatsoever.

 

[Runner77]

I thought it was a clear cut dirty, reckless and suspendable hit. Really no debate whatsoever.

I think most if not everyone agree that it was a suspendable transgression.

There are however arguments raised about how the NHL's punishment appears to be dispensed unevenly when it comes to other similar or worse acts, especially in cases where players have had prior suspensions.

 

[cajmonkey]

Marchand got nothing for jumping Eller and sucker punching him 4 or 5 times. Nada. Zilch. Zero. A repeat offender.

3 games for Byron is ridiculous.

 

[Habs]

I'd personally suspend players on intent even if there is no harm done.

If a guy waves his stick trying to hit someone in the face and misses, i'd still pull him out for a few games.

In a sport where clean hard hits and fighting are tolerated, players have enough tools to take justice into their own hands without being cowards.

I just like your username. BADASS

 

[Perrah]

These last few pages read like a Bruins fan thread. Pretty easy suspension. If someone jumped into a hab like that people would still be livid it wasnt 5 minutes during the game.

 

[Habs Halifax]

A few points here...

1) Byron is guilty of leaving his feet and making contact to the head.
2) IMO, he did delay the hit from behind and made an attempt at hitting him on the front side. Something I think the NHL overlooked.
3) This type of play happens a lot and there is a penalty and that's it. How often do players leave their feet? Very often. He just caught him in a bad position and made contact to his head. Byron clearly tried to jump into his body with no elbows but made contract to the head.
4) Byron does not have history and is not considered a dirty player
5) 3 games is excessive and against the norm for a 1st time offender.

This should be appealed. Byron and the Habs need to realize that this sets the bar on Byron. He could very well finish his check again in the future and make contact to the head. The margin of difference from a body check with no head contact vs a body check with head contact is very small. Depends on how the other player tries to scramble out of the hit. Things happen so fast and it could go one way or another.

 

[waffledave]

I think most if not everyone agree that it was a suspendable transgression.

There are however arguments raised about how the NHL's punishment appears to be dispensed unevenly when it comes to other similar or worse acts, especially in cases where players have had prior suspensions.

I agree with this. But at the end of the day, this hit deserves 3 games, no doubt about it to me. Disappointed in Byron, he doesn't usually make stupid plays like this.

 

[Habs Halifax]

These last few pages read like a Bruins fan thread. Pretty easy suspension. If someone jumped into a hab like that people would still be livid it wasnt 5 minutes during the game.

If a player similar to Byron hit one of our players like this and he is not known as being a dirty player, I'd be fine with the penalty and a 1 game suspended. Most of us know Byron is guilty for leaving his feet but he didn't hit him from behind where he could of easily have. He is guilty of leaving his feet, trying to hit him on the front side of his body and caught his head. No elbows or anything. A nice hard hit meant for the body that caught his head.

This is not about weather or not he should get suspended. This is about how this goes against the norm for a 1st time offender. 3 games is over the top

 

[beowulf]

Not sure if I'd call that suspension worthy, especially since Byron has no history of being dirty and has all of 6 PIM this season. Sucks.

 

[Perrah]

If a player similar to Byron hit one of our players like this and he is not known as being a dirty player, I'd be fine with the penalty and a 1 game suspended. Most of us know Byron is guilty for leaving his feet but he didn't hit him from behind where he could of easily have. He is guilty of leaving his feet, trying to hit him on the front side of his body and caught his head. No elbows or anything. A nice hard hit meant for the body that caught his head.

This is not about weather or not he should get suspended. This is about how this goes against the norm for a 1st time offender. 3 games is over the top

He jumped and put his shoulder into Weegar's chin, no excuses, no what aboutisms. Drew Doughty got 1 playoff game last year for just hitting a guy in the chin. Other people have received 2 game suspensions this year for first offenses and there is a tweet saying he received the 3rd game for injury. Paul Byron isnt known for being dirty, while true doesnt mean he should be treated better than other first time offenders.

 

[OldCraig71]

1 game I could handle based on the players lack of history for these types of things but it is clear that the NHL is sending a message here and Byron just happens to be the guy paying the price.

 

[Habs Halifax]

He jumped and put his shoulder into Weegar's chin, no excuses, no what aboutisms. Drew Doughty got 1 playoff game last year for just hitting a guy in the chin. Other people have received 2 game suspensions this year for first offenses and there is a tweet saying he received the 3rd game for injury. Paul Byron isnt known for being dirty, while true doesnt mean he should be treated better than other first time offenders.

Fair assessment if you use certain past examples. But I guess we can use others as well where it shows the opposite? My memory on this vague. Is there some site that shows a history of suspensions? Would be nice to see this as a whole.

 

[Deebs]

I figured 2, but I guess they are setting the standard going forward. It was an illegal hit to the head, easy decision.