Going by the framework of rule 40, 10 games is quite at odds with it:
Quote:
40. 2 Automatic Suspension — Category I — Any player who deliberately strikes an
official and causes injury or who deliberately applies physical force in any manner
against an official with intent to injure, or who in any manner attempts to injure an
official shall be automatically suspended for not less than twenty (20) games. (For
the purpose of the rule, "intent to injure" shall mean any physical force which a
player knew or should have known could reasonably be expected to cause injury. )
40. 3 Automatic Suspension — Category II — Any player who deliberately applies
physical force to an official in any manner (excluding actions as set out in Category I),
which physical force is applied without intent to injure, or who spits on an official,
shall be automatically suspended for not less than ten (10) games.
|
Essentially, if the arbitrator is using Rule 40 (which doesn't need to be the case), they are saying that Wideman did deliberately use force but didn't think that a crosscheck to back has potential for injury.
It's a weird situation, and it's why the NHLPA was fighting for 0 games, not a reduction.
If this is the case, I'm not really a fan of the decision before hearing it out. I do think it was either accidental, and 0 games is the only call, or it was deliberate and at least 20 games would be the only call.