Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion
a) Quick recovery, especially from a concussion - but, possible.
b) Even so - headfirst into the boards is never a good sign. Also, tell me, viewing that hit, that there wasn't much force.
c) So he went from bent over and hardly making it to being able to hit someone into the boards with force without wiping out or losing his balance? Doesn't fit, to me.
d) He actually injured someone else. Numerous other, real analysts have pointed out that this will actually impact the suspension.
e) Henderson was his "opponent", per se. It's not the best word for it, but there's no denying that he was defenseless.
10+ games easily, IMO.
|
a. I never said there was a concussion.
b. There wasn't much force, other than he's a 200 pound guy going one direction and Henderson wasn't expecting him.
c. What doesn't make sense to you seems to be a pretty big category. maybe it's not the world, maybe it's you.
d. Injury to the "opponent" isn't a factor in this kind of a suspension. And they have to pass the first hurdle - establishing that he's lying.
e. See above.
Zero games, easily, IMO. And if they ignore his own testimony (with no other contrary evidence) any lawyer will have a field day in the appeal.