Tylor ban appealed!!

Finny

Well-Known Member
#2
Hopefully Andy French will see sense. Also, I have checked the game sheets and Justin Sawyer definately only missed two games as I thought and not three as Andy French said.
 

Gaz G

Well-Known Member
#3
A very clever move by the Devils here. As mentioned on the other thread when we weren't appealing the ban, the reason would be because Tylor would have played last night and tomorrow night.

Doing it now means that he can potentially if overturned/reduced play the double header next weekend and have served his ban.
 

zoesdevil

Well-Known Member
Thread starter #4
To be honest even if we had Tylor he wouldn't of made a difference, maybe a goal or two less but not the outcome!! Great thinking by the Devils, let's now put this kind of smart thinking onto the ice and play the hockey we know we can and have done for long periods this season!! ;)
 

ASHIPP

Well-Known Member
#5
Yes - a clever move. I didn't doubt for a minute that the Devils believed that Tylor deserved 5 games for what was, after seeing last night's Elite Ice Hockey Show, no worse than Sawyer's hit on Hatmanis earlier this season......or Lepine's persistent beating of Prpch last weekend.
To let it ride would be tantamount to agreeing Tylor deserved 5 games - how can that ammount be justified when he was already penalised during the game?
 

TheStub

Active Member
#7
Re: Re: Tylor ban appealed!!

charlie_chalke said:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=552570

Matt Martin from the islanders has recieved a 4 match ban for a sucker punch plus roughness!which in my eyes, what Matt Martin did is alot worse then michels!the nhl is a 80+ game season and the elite league is a 50+ game season!so 5 games for michel would be very harsh!but we will see fingers crossed!
You see a lot more sense, consistency and class around bans in the NHL. You'd expect that I know - but surely we are looking at how they manage these matters.

You see open debate, but very little of the pantomime theatrical we get over here. We should be looking for best practice... not the political sham we have in the UK.
 

TheStub

Active Member
#9
Re: Re: Tylor ban appealed!!

Ger-Devils said:
Seems the EIHL now basing their bans on the similar lines of the NHL despite the 28 game difference in the league!
If anything, our bans seem to be stiffer. Of course there are also the hefty fines in the NHL.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#10
Bans should be the same universal. Same as Football. A red card is a three game ban for instance wether you play for Real Madrid or Accrington Stanley.
 

TheStub

Active Member
#11
Re: Re: Tylor ban appealed!!

Zed said:
Bans should be the same universal. Same as Football. A red card is a three game ban for instance wether you play for Real Madrid or Accrington Stanley.
The rules aren't even the same from IIHF member to member. We follow IIHF rules with certain amendments, as does almost every league.
 

Gazza272

Well-Known Member
#12
BAN FOR CRUIKSHANK
February 14, 2011

Coventry Blaze forward Brad Cruikshank will be banned for three matches following an incident in the game against Hull Stingrays on Sunday 13th February 2011.
Cruikshank was handed a match penalty for excessive roughness (sucker punch) in the second period of the encounter at the Skydome.

The suspension is mandatory for the offence, as per Elite League rules, and there is no right of appeal. However, the Elite League will now review the incident on DVD.

The disciplinary committee’s view of the incident could then lead to the suspension being removed, reduced or increased.

So a sucker punch ban is now 3 games. Despite earlier in the season being 2 and despite last week it being 5.


Cant wait to see French lie is way out of this one.
 

zoesdevil

Well-Known Member
Thread starter #14
Sam he replied to my email with the same email he sent to u!! Only thing he changed was that instead of being in meetings he said he's been on the road in various meetings!! :lol:
 
#17
WalesOnline:
CARDIFF Devils spark plug forward Tylor Michel will miss crunch clashes with Belfast Giants and Sheffield Steelers.

The tenacious winger has been ruled out after the Devils decided against following through with an appeal over this five-match ban.

“We sent in an initial notice of appeal but decided against going through with it,” said director of hockey Shannon Hope.

“It’s a massive blow to lose Tylor and we believe the punishment is harsh.

“But the chances of having the ban reduced seemed slim. We don’t believe it was a sucker punch, but if the league officials believe it was then five games is the minimum tariff.”

Michel missed the games at Braehead Clan and Edinburgh Capitals and will also sit out tomorrow’s Challenge Cup semi-final against the Giants and back-to-back league clashes with the Steelers this weekend.

Player-coach Gerad Adams was furious that Belfast complained to the league about Michel’s clash with Dan Welch.

The Devils face a 4-0 first leg deficit but enter tomorrow’s cup clash believing they can set up a final date with Nottingham Panthers.

Adams’ side are on a high after thrashing Edinburgh 12-1 on Sunday – a record Elite League win for the club.

It was Cardiff’s best since a 9-1 stroll at Basingstoke three years ago.

League leaders Sheffield saw their 11-game winning run brought to an end by Panthers in a 4-3 overtime defeat.

Read More http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/ice ... z1E1KtMkzU
 

wildthing74

Well-Known Member
#19
I spoke to Franny on Sunday about this and make of it what you will because to me or him it made no sense.
We were told it would cost £2000 to appeal(even though we have heard before its £250) and that even if we did we would lose becasue the minimum tarrif is 5 games for the offence called on the night.
The obvious question was why didn't Sawyer and Campbell get 5 games and it was because they had it called as a sucker punch on the night and got thrown out so a 2 game suspension followed.So in essence beacuse Smith called it different on the night both Tylor and the club have to accept the ban is 5 games and tough luck.
 

ASHIPP

Well-Known Member
#20
wildthing74 said:
The obvious question was why didn't Sawyer and Campbell get 5 games and it was because they had it called as a sucker punch on the night and got thrown out so a 2 game suspension followed.So in essence beacuse Smith called it different on the night both Tylor and the club have to accept the ban is 5 games and tough luck.
Now I really am confused. :?
What is the point of an appeal system or a committee review if they stand by a decision that seems to completely contradict the 3 game ban 'as per the rules' (which seem to change weekly) stated in the league website about Cruickshank ban. It literally seems to be one rule for one player, one rule for another. :twisted: What a complete joke.
 
Top