[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I always get the sense from your posts that you view this fairly black and white - Wideman intentionally hit Henderson, and that a concussion is the only thing that could conceivably explain his 'temporary insanity'. I don't think that is the argument, but rather the possible concussion explains his lack of 'situational awareness' and that everything that happened was reactionary.

That's not my argument. That, admittedly only a portion, is the NHLPA's argument.

Let's look. Why is the NHLPA appealing to the neutral arbitrator?

Well, we know, they released a statement:

“We are extremely disappointed but not surprised that Gary Bettman upheld the decision of his staff to suspend Dennis Wideman for 20 games. This decision completely ignores the effects of the concussion that Dennis sustained when he was driven into the boards eight seconds before colliding with the linesman. We will appeal to the Neutral Discipline Arbitrator in order to have this decision overturned.”

This is about the only black and white portion of this mess. The NHLPA does not believe Wideman was responsible because of the concussion. What were the effects? Well Bettman's decision very clearly goes over them - although potentially biased.

There's certainly the physical aspects. Balance, wooziness, whatever. I think most of us would agree that still constitutes accidental. That's not really the contentious part about the NHLPA's argument.

It's the behavioural part.

During the hearing, Dr. Comper acknowledged that he was retained to try to
determine whether the player's judgment had been impaired. (Tr. 143) As noted above, Dr.
Comper's February 2 report states that "Mr. Wideman's usual capacity to exercise his judgment. . .
was significantly affected by the head trauma that he experienced" during the game. (Exh. 19)

This is very clearly showing that the NHLPA's expert was not just focused on Wideman 'accidentally' bumping into the linesman. No, indeed the expert (again, hired by the NHLPA) is arguing that Wideman's judgment was impaired. I suppose there's still room to argue what exactly 'judgment' meant in this case. Except Dr. Comper further explained what he meant:

Dr. Comper provided the NHLPA with a report on February 2, stating, among other things, that
Mr. Wideman's "striking of the official could both plausibly and probably be attributed to his confusional
state while he was in the immediate post-concussion phase. Indeed, behavioural changes — including
aggressive and even combative behaviours — are commonly reported behavioural hallmarks of head
trauma. " (Exh. 19) In addition, "it is my view that Mr. Wideman's usual capacity to exercise his
judgment and to control his impulses was significantly affected by the head trauma that he experienced
during the January 27, 2016 game for the period immediately after that incident. "

He's talking about aggessiveness and combative behavioural changes. Go through the decision, or maybe even a couple of my posts and there's ample evidence to suggest that one of the NHLPA's arguments was that Wideman was not "thinking straight" and therefore he did not "intentionally" hit the ref.

But extend that to every incident. If Darnell Nurse was hit in the Sharks-Oilers game, hell even the game before. "Oops, don't remember the incident with Polak, must have been concussed." Boom, no more suspension as long as he gets a doctor to say he was concussed and he will because anyone can be coached. Same thing with Landeskog. "Sorry I crossed check him in the head, I've been feeling woozy lately must have been concussed, appeal my suspension please."

You think that's exaggeration? The NHLPA experts argued that, if Wideman did indeed attack a ref, he did so because he was concussed and the NHLPA is saying he deserves no suspension because of that.

The NHLPA, and myself (if that matters), certainly didn't rule out Wideman just accidentally hitting the linesman. It's their other argument, essentially saying "and if it wasn't an accident, he's still not responsible because..." That makes this a big mess.