No league hearing has been scheduled today, although a call from Brendan Shanahan and/or a fine is possible.
The fact that Clarkson did not hit Dubinsky in the head will work in his favor. The incident took place at 19:27 of the second period with Clarkson getting a charging minor.
Before going any further, here is the hit in question one more time.
I can't say I'm surprised there will be no suspension forthcoming for Clarkson. That's what I expected, honestly. But I'd lie if I said it doesn't upset me. I don't know why it actually angers me a little, I just know it does.
As the Ledger writes, "The fact that Clarkson did not hit Dubinsky in the head will work in his favor." Why is this so? Why should the result of the play have a bearing on this? Fact of the matter is that he tried to hit Dubinsky. What other explanation is there for his pole-vaulting technique that included a chicken wing. I don't think it was an attempt to fly.
This isn't an analogy I necessarily want to bring up but it is comparable in my mind -- on a basic level, nothing more. Imagine if somebody's attempt at murder doesn't go as planned. Would somebody get away with failing to execute their plan? Of course not. They would be locked up in jail. Just because they failed in doing so doesn't mean they didn't try to do so.
Again, I'm a bit loathe to make the comparison to murder. Change it to blackmail if you want, or any other crime that would fit. The point stands this is one of if not my biggest complaints about the punishment criteria right now. Brendan Shanahan has said that injuries don't factor into the decisions to suspend, just the sentencing, the length of the suspension. Well if the reason there was no suspension here is because there was no injury, then how can that be?
To be clear, for the most part I have objected very little to Shanahan's decisions this year and I have really appreciated the transparency. But this one bothers me.