Just the way the article was worded was "We messed up, he should have got a major and perhaps a suspension." But why wouldn't they still review it for a potential suspension otherwise?
I'm having a hard time finding a list of past suspensions. All of the current ones are on a major penalty (Lawrence) or nothing at all (Namestnikov).
I'm virtually certain that they can review any call and assess any suspension they like. The rule below is fairly clear.
Rule 28 – Supplementary Discipline
28.1 Supplementary Discipline - In addition to suspensions imposed
under these rules, the Commissioner may, at his discretion,
investigate any incident that occurs in connection with any Preseason,
Exhibition, League or Playoff game and may assess
additional fines and/or suspensions for any offense committed during
the course of a game or any aftermath thereof by a player,
goalkeeper, Trainer, Manager, Coach or non-playing Club personnel
or Club executive, whether or not such offense has been penalized by
the Referee.
This league has a history of 3 things that are relevant in this situation:
- Basing suspensions off of injuries and not actions
- Not suspending star players
- Favouring host teams
That has benefited the Hounds as much as it has hurt them over the years, so don't take it as a complaint. It's just the facts of the matter.