Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
Since Keith's case does not involve A) a ref, or B) concussions, it's far simpler. It's not likely to set any sort of precedent involving lawsuits and the NHLPA, which is why the Wideman case was so protracted. Not some villainous desire on the part of Gary Bettman to screw over Wideman or the Flames.
|
You're making it sound too simple. If the only time something was questionable was when either a ref or a concussion were involved, there would be a set of suspensions for set infractions. I have a feeling that Keith will say that there was no intent and it was an accident and he should have only got a penalty and not suspension.