Interesting. Bettman's decision looked legally sound enough but you never know until you actually review the record rather than the aspects emphasized by the decision-maker to justify his decision.
I thought 10 games was the most likely outcome in the first place because intent to injure is hard to establish. I am still not convinced that Wideman put his hands up in defence rather than giving him a shot with his stick. It looked to me like there was a bit of extra aggression there rather than just a defensive reaction but I can't say it's unreasonable to read it that way.
I do think the system here has failed on account of delay. That needs to be fixed or they have to allow the player to play until the process is complete. I don't think it hurt the Flames in particular but it has definitely had a negative impact on Wideman and is wrong in principle to sit out a suspension while it is still under appeal.
|