Because the NHL suspends on outcome, not on intent. Its the reason we have been robbed of so much elite careers around the league from concussions and cheap shots. Hits like Byron's happen all the time, never a suspension. You won't see it again either, it was a chicken **** call.
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?