[News] Judge confirms Arbitrator's decision to cut down Wideman's suspension

[Heavy Jack]

If that C4L post doesn't convince you that 10 games was sufficient punishment nothing will. Great stuff C4L.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Josh Ho Sang deserved a 10 gamer for the vicious hit he placed on his teammate at the dome a few games ago. With an extra 10 for being a ###### and wearing 66.

[calgaryblood]

Can't wait until Wideman is gone for on ice reasons and especially so we don't ever have to talk about or defend him ever again.

Can't remember a player I wanted gone as much as I want Wideman gone. Just terrible his entire tenure here including that season where he out scored his many mistakes a game. Just a total cancer on the ice and off. Good riddance mr Wideman and I hope you enjoy the same retirement as the ref you hit, accidentally or otherwise.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Can't wait until Wideman is gone for on ice reasons and especially so we don't ever have to talk about or defend him ever again.

Can't remember a player I wanted gone as much as I want Wideman gone. Just terrible his entire tenure here including that season where he out scored his many mistakes a game. Just a total cancer on the ice and off. Good riddance mr Wideman and I hope you enjoy the same retirement as the ref you hit, accidentally or otherwise.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by sun

Hell, even Weber's hit above looks intentional. It wasn't and neither was Wideman's. He didn't see him and then he did. He braced himself. It happens all the time. He didn't see him and then he did.

How can you say that when Wideman's own doctors testified that Wideman did not recall what he was thinking at the time of the incident because he lost memory. They even testified that concussions cause aggression and momentary lack of judgment, ergo it may not have been accident but he was not responsible because it was the concussion. I mean that was his argument...well except when he changed his stories multiple times to fit whatever ####ty narrative he wanted to be spun.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

The arbitrator and the judge disagree with your assessment. Otherwise he would have received the 20 games (at least).

No the arbitrator disagreed. The judge just ruled that the arbitrator had the authority to make the decision based on the CBA and the interpretation of his authority. The judge did not make a ruling on Wideman.

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Uh oh! Shaky footing? I better really, really leave this conversation now.

You have proven that Wideman did not deliberately smash his stick into the back of Henderson. It was only an accident. Even though it was an accident, it somehow still warranted punishment. In my opinion, a hell of a lot more.

IDFK. You guys win. Wideman did it by accident. Charged up behind him, smoked his ass, skated away, texted about it later, and it was all just a big old accident. Gotcha. I'm done. Your incoming disagreement is something that I agree to disagree with.

C4L, seriuosly, how do you not see him wind up? How?

Ok, done. Bye. I promise.

Man, you are having a bad night. You refuse to see both sides of the situation. You are normally a great poster, but why are you gonna die on the sword over Wideman? Why can't you see another side to it.

First off, this is ancient history. Secondly, no matter what, based on Widemans past, he would never have intended to hurt someone permanently. Did he make a mistake? YES.

This is not life and death. And yes, someone can no longer Ref. The deal is that you can get killed crossing the train tracks, get cancer. We, as a society don't like people that do things intentionally to people. WIDEMAN did not mean to do it. Deal with it.

While we appreciate the sport and all athletes, fans, officials.... you can get a puck in the head and die by mistake at the next game. The thing is you have to keep moving forward and not hold such hate and contempt.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So it ended 10 games early (actually 20-odd). You don't get to pretend that he had years left to go in his career and should be compensated (or Wideman punished) on that basis.

As Jiri noted, Henderson is still suffering effects today. I'm no personal injury lawyer, but it does in fact seem quite likely that Henderson would have an argument for compensation beyond the end of his NHL career.

Also, you missed my point with the Moore reference - I wasn't comparing Wideman's frame of mind or intentions to Bertuzzi's. I was noting how "he didn't have much of a career left anyway" is a very poor argument for trivializing an action. To reiterate: Dennis Wideman prematurely ended Don Henderson's NHL career. That is an uncontestable fact.

[GioforPM]

C4L's post is exactly how I see it. To me a lot of it has to do with comon sense and history. Wideman has never been an aggressive or dirty guy. He had no reason to target a linesman. He didn't even look mad - just woozy.

Hrudey says right off "Wideman doesn't even see him". That's exactly what I think happened. He didn't see him until too late and braced for impact at the last second. Henderson was completely unaware and went down hard, just like when a player hits his own teammate - the results are worse because no one expects it.

For this to be an intentional act, Wideman has to (a) be mad about a hit that wasn't very dirty, if at all; (b) decide to take revenge; (c) decide to take revenge on an official; (d) decide to hurt that official. Wideman wasn't complaining about the hit as he skated to the bench. He wasn't looking for the player who hit him. He seemed pretty intent on getting to the bench IMO.

Once again, I recognize there are people who see the opposite, but I've never heard why Wideman would make these choices.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

To reiterate: Dennis Wideman prematurely ended Don Henderson's NHL career. That is an uncontestable fact.

To reiterate: Don Henderson's NHL career was going to end after that season. That is an uncontestable fact.

Of course Henderson should be compensated for the effects of his injury, including loss of income from whatever other occupation he would be pursuing after the end of his NHL career in 2016. But his career as a linesman, beyond those couple of dozen games that he lost, is not part of that discussion.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

C4L's post is exactly how I see it. To me a lot of it has to do with comon sense and history. Wideman has never been an aggressive or dirty guy. He had no reason to target a linesman. He didn't even look mad - just woozy.

Hrudey says right off "Wideman doesn't even see him". That's exactly what I think happened. He didn't see him until too late and braced for impact at the last second. Henderson was completely unaware and went down hard, just like when a player hits his own teammate - the results are worse because no one expects it.

For this to be an intentional act, Wideman has to (a) be mad about a hit that wasn't very dirty, if at all; (b) decide to take revenge; (c) decide to take revenge on an official; (d) decide to hurt that official. Wideman wasn't complaining about the hit as he skated to the bench. He wasn't looking for the player who hit him. He seemed pretty intent on getting to the bench IMO.

Once again, I recognize there are people who see the opposite, but I've never heard why Wideman would make these choices.

Even on the bench after it happened, you can see one of the players mentioning it to him and Wideman looked confused until he saw it on the big screen.

It was incidental and there was no intent to injure. The 10 games was justified. More than that was too punitive.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by 4X4

He wound up with both arms, stick in both hands, and f-ing smoked him dead center, in the back, at maximum impact. Perfectly timed. Target. Deliberate.

He was just getting his stick into position to leave the ice. What is deliberate about Wideman's actions between getting hit into the boards and colliding with Henderson? Skating slowly to the bench on autopilot...

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

How can you say that when Wideman's own doctors testified that Wideman did not recall what he was thinking at the time of the incident because he lost memory. They even testified that concussions cause aggression and momentary lack of judgment, ergo it may not have been accident but he was not responsible because it was the concussion. I mean that was his argument...well except when he changed his stories multiple times to fit whatever ####ty narrative he wanted to be spun.

All of the testimony after the incident is largely irrelevant. And the things you like to point out don't fully contradict each other - more than one thing can be true. For your argument that the concussion can cause agression/momentary lack of judgment, we must be talking about milliseconds here. The only time Wideman looks violent is the quarter second where the collision happens. Not before, not after. Reactionary 'violence' I suppose...but really, it was a coincidence of factors coming together leading to the incident.


We never see Wideman's eyes. The idea that he didn't really see what was happening seems so much more probable to me than any other conspiracy theory. If Wideman really wanted to lay out Henderson, he could have done it a lot harder, and made it look like an accident at the same time.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

All of the testimony after the incident is largely irrelevant..

Ah yes, expert testimony during the hearing is clearly irrelevant.

For your argument that the concussion can cause agression/momentary lack of judgment, we must be talking about milliseconds here.

Ah my argument? THAT WAS WIDEMAN'S ARGUMENT. At least that presented by the experts hire by the NHLPA. Jeeze. People didn't even read any of the documents but are sure to chime in a lot.

And the things you like to point out don't fully contradict each other - more than one thing can be true

And how does "I don't remember the incident, it was all a blur" and "I remember the incident, I just didn't see him until too late" both argued by Wideman long after the incident took place not contradict one another?

We never see Wideman's eyes. The idea that he didn't really see what was happening seems so much more probable to me than any other conspiracy theory.

While I agree, then why the need to hire two doctors and have them talk about concussion issues, including aggression and lack of judgement?

My issue with Wideman hasn't been the incident itself. If he just said it was an accident I would probably believe him - at least with my Flames homerglasses on like majority of us. However, it was the clear bull#### he was feeding to these doctors, the obvious coaching he had been given, to get the concussion diagnosis right and give him the best chance of "well, if you don't believe it was an accident then I still wasn't at fault because of this..." that made me sour on him. Especially as Henderson's in the hospital and this clown is blaming the "stupid refs and stupid media."

[sun]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Uh oh! Shaky footing? I better really, really leave this conversation now.

You have proven that Wideman did not deliberately smash his stick into the back of Henderson. It was only an accident. Even though it was an accident, it somehow still warranted punishment. In my opinion, a hell of a lot more.

IDFK. You guys win. Wideman did it by accident. Charged up behind him, smoked his ass, skated away, texted about it later, and it was all just a big old accident. Gotcha. I'm done. Your incoming disagreement is something that I agree to disagree with.

C4L, seriuosly, how do you not see him wind up? How?

Ok, done. Bye. I promise.

Yes, you had better leave the conversation because your posts on the subject are a touch embarrassing. Of course an accident still warrants punishment. Who would ever argue otherwise? Reasonable punishment, like say... I dunno... 10 games. You know, the number everyone aside from Bettman has agreed is fair.

We will clearly never agree. Your argument would force me to believe of Wideman as a violent imbecile, a hothead, a player incapable of controlling himself to the point where he violates the number one core principle of the game, hammered into every player from day one. A player who instantly threw everything we know about him and his character (800 GP) out the window, and violently attack the guy who calls offsides. The first player in the history of the NHL to assault a ref in such a manner is Dennis frickin Wideman. Possible, certainly. Though extremely unlikely.

My argument forces you to give someone the benefit of the doubt, to realize accidents happen. To look at countless examples of similar collisions, where intent seems to be present, but which clearly isn't. To look back at times in your own life experience where your split reactions have caused accidents. To accept that a player can collide with an official without intending to injure him. To attribute weight to the more likely scenario.

The arbiter noted "there was not even a scintilla of evidence to suggest why a player with Wideman's excellent disciplinary record would intentionally strike Linesman Henderson [...] the Arbitrator observed that the complete absence of any imaginable motive can give pause in assessing whether Wideman made contact with Henderson with intent to harm him.

Guess the arbiter just has his Flames homer glasses on...

Since I want the last word, I think this is the part where I say I'm done, I promise.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

We never see Wideman's eyes. The idea that he didn't really see what was happening seems so much more probable to me than any other conspiracy theory. If Wideman really wanted to lay out Henderson, he could have done it a lot harder, and made it look like an accident at the same time.

Might be a hard thing for people to understand when they have never had their bell rung before! I have had my bell rung after I fell off a horse and when I went to stand up everything was spinning so when my dad asked if I was okay I said I was fine. I wasn't fine everything was still spinning but I couldn't really comprehend my feelings or surroundings. Seeing Wideman at the bench he still seems confused and unaware that he even hit a lineman. You can see him reacting calmly to teammates but he seems unaware of the severity of the situation.

[smiggy77]

Originally Posted by 4X4

What a pile of crap. So since they "already wanted him to retire", it's ok for a pro hockey player to break his neck? A history of being in the wrong place? What, did a few pucks hit his skates? Sounds like a great reason to absolutely demolish him from behind with a crosscheck.



Can't believe what I'm reading. Wideman should have gotten more than Bertuzzi for ending a career.

Source that he broke his neck please.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

No the arbitrator disagreed. The judge just ruled that the arbitrator had the authority to make the decision based on the CBA and the interpretation of his authority. The judge did not make a ruling on Wideman.

That is true. Arbitrator ruled on the hit and the judge ruled on the process (discretion).

The only arguable misapplication of justice, in my opinion, was having a hearing to potentially reduce a 20 game penalty to 10 games, is holding that hearing on game 19. The NHL should feel shame.