Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx
I know that, but isn't it convenient that this was the first case the NHL has ever tried to obtain phone evidence for? Why is that?
Why did they even think that was necessary?
|
Umm, probably because this was a complex case both in terms of the incident itself and the wider issue of concussions in hockey?
The interesting thing to me about this decision is that by saying rule 40.3 was the applicable rule, the arbitrator believes Wideman deliberately made contact with Henderson. So the final ruling is basically "everybody on all sides was wrong."