The Banning of HD: Final Thoughts

I have received (and reviewed) all the accounts of the HD Affair that I am likely to and tried to piece the puzzle parts together. It has proved, not surprisingly, to be impossible to reconcile all the details and impressions and recollections provided by eyewitnesses. Much like police reports at the scene of an accident or crime not everyone remembers the events the same. In fact it is routine for stories to vary so that after the fact the best that can be accomplished is to recreate a likely sequence of events. Video and even still shots would probably help resolve some of the uncertainties. I have seen accounts by those disposed to favor HD perhaps and those representing the league and some from individuals who don't, as far as I can tell, have a dog in the fight. And even after all that I can't claim to conclusively know exactly what happened. I think I know what happened--but no more than that.
What I do know is the "current" rule book is dated 2006 and full of anachronisms. I know the action taken with respect to HD was largely outside the scope of the rule book even though the language of the rule book plainly covered such a situation. I know the actions taken were inconsistent with the hierarchy of authority many of the MS board members have championed. And I know the board can act with alacrity, rightly or wrongly, when so inclined.
I don't see any real value in further speculations but I do think it may be instructive to see what the MS does or doesn't do as a follow-up to the incident I reported (involving at least one CPL ref and some of my players) on this blog and to Mr. Stahr. A ref that Mr. Stahr confirmed the league has identified. Will the league take any action? Will they make a public statement regarding the incident? Will they uphold their own standards? We will see. And just to help out I will, on a weekly basis, be reminding them until such point in time they do something.