Skip to content

Keith to have hearing with NHL

Jun 5, 2013, 11:44 AM EDT

Chicago defenseman Duncan Keith will have a disciplinary hearing with the NHL over his high-stick to the face of Kings forward Jeff Carter last night in Los Angeles.

The hearing will take place at 1:30 pm ET.

Game 4 of the Western Conference finals goes tomorrow in Los Angeles.

Keith was given a double-minor for high sticking Carter:

Keith has a history of supplementary discipline. The 29-year-old was suspended five games last March for an elbow to the head of Vancouver’s Daniel Sedin.

“It was accidental,” Keith said of his high stick on Carter. “I wanted to give him a tap but not where I got him. I felt bad.”

Update: Here’s a different angle of the play for your consideration…

http://www-thescore.s3.amazonaws.com/images/124199/original.gif?1370398961

  1. Windmiller4 - Jun 5, 2013 at 11:50 AM

    I’m a Kings fan and would love to see Keith not play the next game, but this would be a disgrace to the league if they suspended someone for a high stick in the playoffs. I guess were gonna have to wait and see what the wheel of justice says.

    • tycobbfromfangraphs - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM

      And if that high stick catches someone in the eye and blinds them?

      It’s a reckless and stupid play that needs to be a suspension.
      What is so hard to understand. This is one player purposely attacking another with his stick and sending it into his face. Keith is lucky he didn’t catch an eye.

      Yeeeeeees why suspend a player for a “high stick”, why suspend a player for “charging”? why suspend a player for “boarding”?

      • valoisjoeybfeld69 - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:33 PM

        minimum one game and $$$$$$$$$$. Reckless to say the least.

      • no - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:51 PM

        good god you’d make a great helicopter mother

        (kid gets punched in the face) IT WAS ASSAULT!!! HE COULD HAVE SUFFERED BRAIN TRAUMA!!!

        last time I checked this was hockey, not a Montessori school

      • hockeyflow33 - Jun 5, 2013 at 5:14 PM

        Can’t be suspending guys for things that didn’t happen

      • leiterfelixleiter - Jun 5, 2013 at 6:46 PM

        Hell, what if it had killed him!

        Let’s deal with what it did do. It cut him and knocked out some teeth which to you and me is a severe injury but to an NHL player that’s nothing.

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - Jun 5, 2013 at 7:29 PM

        It’s nothing if it’s the result of hard play, when it’s because the other guy wants to simply do it, there is a problem.

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - Jun 5, 2013 at 7:30 PM

        LOL 20 stitches just because Keith wanted too and you people are still acting like no biggie.

    • bauxjangles - Jun 5, 2013 at 5:29 PM

      The thing is that the league has had situations before where they have identified a stick to be a weapon. It’s the reason why players can’t just go around slashing and high sticking people as they deem fit. As a Norris trophy winning defenseman, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for what Keith did.

      It doesn’t matter if he is sorry. It doesn’t matter that he just meant to “tap” him. It shouldn’t have been done period.

    • sabatimus - Jun 5, 2013 at 5:29 PM

      This wasn’t a mere high stick. This was a sucker whack from behind to the head of an opponent, a completely classless and deliberate play that warrants at least a game off.

  2. hockinj25 - Jun 5, 2013 at 11:53 AM

    The slash was intentional but I don’t think he meant to hit him in the face. Give him a fine but no suspension.

    • doubles22 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:27 PM

      Not to compare the incidents, but like Bertuzzi / Moore & McSorley / Brashear, when guys act on bad intent the end result can be far more damaging than what may have been intended. I think both Keith and Carter are quite fortunate the damage from this was not more serious.

      While I hold Keith entirely responsible for this, I ain’t sending a lot of sympathy Carter’s way. Don’t deliberately take a cheap shot at a guy’s bare hand if you don’t want to risk retribution. Keith is clearly at fault here, but Carter’s bush-league play precipitated it.

  3. danaking - Jun 5, 2013 at 11:54 AM

    The double minor was deserved, but there’s no intent to injure. As pang and Engblom said, Keith appears to be genuinely apologetic. This does not warrant a suspension.

    Does is worrisome is what gets called and what does not, especially in the playoffs. I’m all for letting guys play, but the refs let things go that are penalty worthy, tempers get high, then something stupid happens and people wonder where that came from. Or, the announcers will mention this has been building all game/series. Well, someone should have reminded these guys to play hockey. Play it tight and rough–it’s the playoffs–but too much of this BS is clearly intended to incite and hope for a timely penalty down the road when someone has finally had enough, thus excusing the previous 15 hacks/slashes/elbows/holds/you name it.

    • no - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:06 PM

      agreed. the ref had a chance to deescalate this situation and totally dropped the ball. does he get a disciplinary hearing, or just another paycheck?

  4. fubar77 - Jun 5, 2013 at 11:59 AM

    Agreed. While I think there was intent there to get Carter’s attention, I don’t think he meant to hurt him. His stick just got higher than intended. It deserves a look, but I don’t think a suspension is in order. Hockinj25′s idea of a fine would be acceptable, but not necessarily mandatory. BTW I have no dog in this fight.

  5. kantnockdahustle89 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:00 PM

    I dont see any sort of suspension coming. Carter tried to hit his glove away or hit his hand so hes pissed about that. Clearly didnt mean to hit him in the face. The body sure but, not the face. And yes him clearly apologizing should help.

    • manchestermiracle - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:30 PM

      It really doesn’t matter whether or not Keith “meant” to hit Carter in the face. Keith chose to swing his stick up in an irresponsible manner. Just because you didn’t mean to cause harm with an action that could clearly cause harm is nothing but an after-the-fact excuse.

      • comeonnowguys - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:11 PM

        If only they had something they could do in game… like place where you have to sit when you do something wrong. Oh, and if it’s really bad, they should make you sit there longer. That would totally be appropriate in this situation. If only…

      • mpg44 - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:59 PM

        And also whether carter did or did not mean to hit Keith in the bare hand should not have been over looked either. Two wrongs don’t make a right , both should carry the blame . Move on , and play hockey!

  6. blackhawksdynasty - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:05 PM

    Hopefully Duncs is only warned and fined. This doesn’t warrant a suspension. He certainly intended to give Carter a whack, but not that high. As soon as he made contact with the face, you could see he was truly remorseful. These hacks and whacks occur all over the ice, all the time. It would be a shame if Keith is suspended. If he does, I’d have to wonder if the hidden puppeteer is trying to extend the series for ratings, and ultimately the almighty dollar.

    • tlndma - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:15 PM

      Duncs?

    • rocoop - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:45 PM

      Stop with the excuses..Hawks lost with him last night, so they suspend him because they want to give an advantage to the Kings??? I guess you think this series was over before it started..And I thought Shark fans were bad….STOP WITH THE EXCUSES

    • sabatimus - Jun 5, 2013 at 5:30 PM

      Last time I read a crock of s**t this bad was…earlier today in one of the Biogenesis articles.

    • bauxjangles - Jun 5, 2013 at 5:31 PM

      If Doughty pulled a move like that on Kane, would you be just as hopeful that he only gets a warning and a fine?

  7. tyler4richardson - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:07 PM

    I’m sure Keith was just trying to test the durability of Carter’s visor.

  8. deeznutz3d - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:08 PM

    My question to all you guys saying he doesn’t deserve a suspension, would you feel the same way if this was a Cooke or Torres type of player that was in this situation? I think he deserves a game. Yea he didnt want to hit him in the mouth, but that doesn’t negate the fact that he still used his stick as a weapon.

    • jeffchadwick - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:14 PM

      The NHL has taken the stance on player safety that result matters more than intent. Keith will surely receive a suspension.

      • manchestermiracle - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:20 PM

        Intent can only be inferred. Results are plain for all to see. Was Carter a jerk in knocking away the glove Keith was trying to put back on? Yes. Unfortunately for Keith, his attempt at a come-back was over the top and the result was a stick to the face.

      • comeonnowguys - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:13 PM

        Jerk? He was reckless. He knew he was slashing at Keith’s bare hand.

        It deserve a stick in the chops, but let’s turn down the fandom a tad, shall we?

      • comeonnowguys - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:40 PM

        amazing what the omission of the word “didn’t” does to a sentence. Yikes.

    • polegojim - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:29 PM

      Ok Deez… then … SO DID CARTER by your definition.

      No matter what Carter says, it appears he tried to CHOP Keiths hand… and then say ‘oops I was just trying to stick his glove’. Did Carter not think Keith would actually REACH OUT to pick up his glove and there might be a hand in the area???

      What if he chopped him and broke his hand or finger… by your definition, the ACT… not intent… deserves the penalty… so if anything BOTH should go.

      Can’t have it both ways.

      • deeznutz3d - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:13 PM

        I’m not sitting here defending Carter, we all know what he was trying to do. The fact of the matter is that the retaliator always gets caught and keith went overboard.

      • wingedwheel05 - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:15 PM

        So by your definition a slash to the hands is equal to a slash to the face? Makes sense………

      • polegojim - Jun 5, 2013 at 11:36 PM

        Now… you’re making up rules… it’s not the part of the body… it’s the intent… right?

      • polegojim - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:30 PM

        Deez…. no longer true with video recording and replay… that’s old school. It’s EASY to see what Carter was doing as well… and not difficult to see his intent.

        WingedWheel… so now you want to ‘degrees’ of threat… if Player A did this… the results could have been X…. but Player B did this… the results could have been Y… therefore, the league has determined that only Player B should be suspended because the potential, possible, implied degree of injury to Player A was greater… Freaking…. PLEASEEEEEEE… and NOT.
        From a fellow Red Wing fan… I’d expect much more on this one.

  9. hammerhead5573 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:09 PM

    It is what it is. Im a big supporter of Keith and in the last 5 games he was incredible. If he gets suspended than someone else better step up. He could have gone to fight him he could tripped him he could have done other things besides put your stick near his face. With that said, i have been watching Keith since he has been in the league and the only time he has done something like this is when the opposing player did something to him that was unacceptable. And honestly who among us wouldn’t have gone after someone who whacked ur hand, hard with a stick.

  10. tlndma - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:13 PM

    One Game.
    He intentionally swung his stick with one hand and hit the opposing player in the face, from behind. He did cause some injury. Was he provoked? Absolutely. Do I think he was aiming for the head? No, neither do I think he was aiming at the ankles. You are responsible for your stick. I might be getting soft in my old age but, I just don’t think a slash to the face can go unpunished.

    • adambballn - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:00 PM

      The slash to the face didn’t go unpunished… he got a 4 minute major penalty which is standard in the NHL for a slash to the face that results in blood.

  11. 2redmond - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:19 PM

    I don’t think he should be suspended, but with that said I find it laughable that people bring up the “truly apologetic” stance with Keith. The courts are filled with people who are very remorseful towards their victims! It’s time for some to stop acting like they know what his true intent was.

    • manchestermiracle - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:27 PM

      Agree with your take on his apology, though in my opinion it was likely genuine. Lots of folks are “sorry” about something they caused, but that doesn’t mitigate responsibility. “Yes, judge, I pointed my gun at him but didn’t expect it to fire.” Well, then, I suppose you shouldn’t have pointed it at him in the first place.

      And I agree with others on here that Carter’s hack at Keith’s glove in order to further delay him being able to put it back on might also have drawn a penalty, but the bottom line is Keith’s retaliation was a result of poor judgment. The sort of judgment that the league needs to consistently eliminate.

      That said, I don’t think this is suspension-worthy, but Shanahan has been pretty inconsistent with punishment.

  12. pirovash88 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:21 PM

    No intent to injure Carter? Dude whacks at his head and he didn’t mean to hurt him? BS, just because he was apologetic means absolutely nothing. I expect more out of a player like Keith, he should know that plays like these are reckless. Doesn’t matter if it was in the heat of the moment, point is, he did it.

    • dt58 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:49 PM

      Again, I think the intent to injure came from Carter “chopping wood”. Both should get suspended or neither should.

    • bhawks1 - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:25 PM

      So lets go back and suspend Clifford for whacking Rosival over the back of his head while he was down on the ice. Looked to me like he meant to do that.

  13. 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:34 PM

    Nobody who was actually involved in this game thought this was malicious or worth more than four minutes. If the league decides differently it just reinforces the fact that they are probably the biggest joke of the Big Four.

  14. sjsharks66 - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:43 PM

    If he gets suspended I will be highly disappointed. What are they going to suspend a player from every team the kings play?

    This post season has been an embarrassment to the league. Missed calls, iffy suspensions, ice conditions, post game comments and non comments.

    • rocoop - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:50 PM

      Please do us all a favor and get over your exit from the playoffs already…

    • bauxjangles - Jun 5, 2013 at 5:33 PM

      As a Sharks fan, you should be used to being highly disappointed by now….

  15. adambballn - Jun 5, 2013 at 12:56 PM

    And what time is Carter’s hearing for slashing Keith’s bare hands?

    • dannymac17 - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:31 PM

      he didnt slash his bare hand, he was moving over him and his stick came down. he wasnt even looking at his hand. keith was looking at his head

    • 2redmond - Jun 5, 2013 at 4:01 PM

      Nothing on the docket for Carter, though most of us in LA are hearing that Slava Voynov has been summoned to New York to meet with league officials. I guess they’ve never seen someone (Niklas Hjalmarsson) look the way he did before and after taking the blast off the leg. Officials are reviewing tapes to see if Voynov skated over to him and “apologized” for the shot!

  16. bhawks1 - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM

    “Keith has a history of supplementary discipline. The 29-year-old was suspended five games last March for an elbow to the head of Vancouver’s Daniel Sedin.”

    History? His suspension last year was the first time in his career. Torres has a history not Keith.

    • steverolley - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:45 PM

      that Gif is brutal,

      bam right in the face

      I guess it looked accidental? And look right after Keith skated over top of him and apologized?

  17. nightfireop - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:42 PM

    As a Kings fan, I fully take in consideration that Keith apologized for the incident. Seeing this as unbiased as possible, I do hope he doesn’t get suspended, it shouldn’t be.

  18. rocoop - Jun 5, 2013 at 1:51 PM

    He won’t be playing tomorrow night……….

  19. dannymac17 - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:27 PM

    there is a difference between trying to give him a tap and elevating the stick. he knew what he was doing.

  20. indianhead1992 - Jun 5, 2013 at 2:28 PM

    I completely understand Keith did not want to hit him in the face with that slash. I hope he doesn’t and he shouldn’t get suspended because the habs were shooting pucks right at yhe Ottawa players at one point in the series and nothing happened. but Keith apologizing doesn’t mean he shouldnt get no suspension. because that will open a whole new door for physical play, “I said I was sorry for boarding him on that play.” I know its two different penalties but the apology should not be the reason why he only gets a fine.

  21. winefool - Jun 5, 2013 at 4:24 PM

    Context counts. Carter started by whacking Keith in the back with his stick. Then he whacked Keith in the hand with his stick. He was being a d1ck and clearly deserved some retaliation. Keith whacked him back and accidently caught his face. He got a double minor and Carter should have gotten 2 min for slashing as well.

    You can play hockey with a cut on your face, you can’t with a broken hand. Nobody deserves a suspension – though I won’t be surprised if they give him one game (I’m with the conspiracy theorists here on the prolonged series = $$$).

  22. Jay - Jun 5, 2013 at 6:16 PM

    Carter instigated the entire thing. I don’t see how Keith should get very much punishment for this at all. Carter slashed his hand and tried to keep him from picking up his glove. This is a dirty move. Carter wasn’t looking, but he knew what Keith was trying to do and then he put his stick there. I would be pissed off too if I were Keith and I can’t say I would do anything differently. Keith shouldn’t get any suspension at all.

  23. ronthecubsfan - Jun 5, 2013 at 6:40 PM

    Definitely has to be at least a fine. A small suspension might make sense as well because this was quite a reckless play. Hawks fans would be screaming bloody murder if someone did this same thing to Kane or Hossa. I’m not sure we’d be happy with “just a fine.”

    And while Carter might have started the whole thing, it’s awfully hard to blame him for someone swinging their stick at his head.

    I don’t care how apologetic he is.

Featured video

Bettman hears the boos in Philly
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. S. Crosby (1896)
  2. L. Stempniak (1752)
  3. D. Roy (1493)
  4. A. Rome (1328)
  5. C. Franson (1327)
  1. R. O'Reilly (1319)
  2. D. Booth (1211)
  3. R. Nash (1143)
  4. P. Subban (1053)
  5. M. Ribeiro (1044)