Wideman Decision Expected Wednesday

[IgiTang]

I voted suspension. Not because I think it was malicious, but because you have to discipline any sort of abuse of an official, regardless of intent.

I think he only gets 1 game as a reminder to the players that the act, purposeful or not, cannot go undisciplined.

But Wideman got rocked, was skating back to the bench and he was clearly suffering from some ill effects. Hes infront of the opponents bench, cant focus, cant think, just trying to get to the bench and he see someone coming, knowing hes vulnerable, gets his hands up and pushes who ever was coming at him, trying to get to safety.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

This article is stupid:

http://www.tsn.ca/talent/wideman-cou...esman-1.429825

Even if it was unintentional, Wideman’s hit may result in a 10-game suspension for physical abuse of officials according to Rule 40 (Physical Abuse of Officials) in the NHL’s rulebook.

The lesser penalty, a minimum 10-game “Category II” suspension, is for “any player who deliberately applies physical force to an official in any manner (excluding Category I), which physical enforce is applied without intent to injure.”

Emphasis added.

Does the NHL consider intentional and deliberate to be different things all of a sudden?


But hey, I guess it gets more click bait to write about how he's in trouble than saying "he'll probably get nothing".

[CliffFletcher]

This is a fascinating thread. I'd love to zip into a parallel reality where Wideman was wearing an Avalanche jersey and read the comments.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Have you read the thread. Probably at least half the people that say he should be suspended just want him off the roster. He isn't exactly popular these days.

There is a bias, but it's the opposite of what you think.

I think though the spread would be bigger with a bigger portion saying suspension if it was a neutral voting base.


Personally I don't think it was overly malicious or purposeful. But the NHL has to protect officials and he will get the minimum allowable suspension (10 games I think?).

[Grimbl420]

This happens 10 seconds before he hits the ref. I think it's a pretty safe bet he wasn't thinking or seeing clearly after smashing his face into the glass. I also think this is all the evidence Wideman needs to avoid suspension here.

The fact that he was allowed to continue to play after these events and not go through the NHL's concussion protocol is the real reason for concern here.

[pylon]

LOL. I am getting a kick out of the hypocrisy of this thread. If this was any Canuck, Oiler, or Leaf, there would be so much faux outrage and calls for "OMGWTFBBQ!!1!!!1 NHL, threeve Biliionty gamez plz!"

Wideman should be suspended, and rightfully so. Just looks like dude had a little embarrassment tantrum to me.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

I voted suspension. Not because I think it was malicious, but because you have to discipline any sort of abuse of an official, regardless of intent.

This raises an interesting question though. If you are punishing regardless of intent because an official was hit, what about the hundreds of times in the past officials have been hit?

Errant shots? Clearing attempts? Punches from fights? Body checks to opposing players when linesman was in the way? How about just random running into a linesman?

If what you say is how the NHL handles it, we'd have seen dozens of suspensions throughout the years for inadvertent player/official run ins.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

This is a fascinating thread. I'd love to zip into a parallel reality where Wideman was wearing an Avalanche jersey and read the comments.

I'd probably think that there sure are a lot of dumb sports fans out there. But since I am a Flames fan, I say breach of contract - terminate!

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by pylon

LOL. I am getting a kick out of the hypocrisy of this thread. If this was any Canuck, Oiler, or Leaf, there would be so much faux outrage and calls for "OMGWTFBBQ!!1!!!1 NHL, threeve Biliionty gamez plz!"

Wideman should be suspended, and rightfully so. Just looks like dude had a little embarrassment tantrum to me.

How is it a tantrum?

Was he mad he got hit? Players get hit all the time and don't get upset. Was he upset because he thought the hit was dirty? If he was he hasn't said anything about it, and didn't look mad on the bench.

Was it the stick slap on the ice to signal a line change that makes it look like a tantrum?

[saillias]

Worst case outcome is status quo. I think everyone would be a little disappointed if he didn't sit a few. Everyone except Wideman and Hartley.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

At least one official was directly involved though. I know linesman can't call all infractions, but it would seem ridiculous if they couldn't at least call an "abuse of an official" penalty when the abuse was on them, or least be able to report it to the ref to call.

Unless Henderson has eyes in the back of his head, he would have had no idea why the collision occurred. Especially because incidental contact can, and does, happen.

At any rate, I am sure they can eject players based on video and they had access to the same reel that everyone else did, yet Wideman was not ejected.

No, they can't. Much like with missed goals, once the next play started, they can't go back.

[Passe La Puck]

What this thread has taught me is CP has a lot of people who have never played the game...and apparently have never walked into something when not paying attention.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

I voted yes.

Intentional or not, you have to protect officials.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I voted yes.

Intentional or not, you have to protect officials.

So, this situation aside, your stance is if a player accidentally hits a referee, he should face a suspension?

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

How is it a tantrum?

Was he mad he got hit? Players get hit all the time and don't get upset. Was he upset because he thought the hit was dirty? If he was he hasn't said anything about it, and didn't look mad on the bench.

Was it the stick slap on the ice to signal a line change that makes it look like a tantrum?

I said that's what it looks like to me, I didn't say that's what it was.

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

So, this situation aside, your stance is if a player accidentally hits a referee, he should face a suspension?

It's hilarious how many people seem to share this opinion. Refs get hit nearly every game, albeit not this spectacularly.

[Dogbert]

Forget the contact with the ref - I have no medical training or experience whatsoever, yet I can tell Wideman is concussed from my couch. He played a regular shift for the rest of the game. Why wasn't the concussion protocol followed?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

So, this situation aside, your stance is if a player accidentally hits a referee, he should face a suspension?

You're both using oversimplifications. It looks like Wideman intentionally hits Henderson. Perception is often reality. That should be blatantly obvious, as if Wideman simply fell into Henderson, there wouldn't have been a single comment about it.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

You're both using oversimplifications. It looks like Wideman intentionally hits Henderson. Perception is often reality. That should be blatantly obvious, as if Wideman simply fell into Henderson, there wouldn't have been a single comment about it.

As I said, I was commenting on his specific comment that "intentional or not, you have to protect the officials".

[Ashasx]

I just don't see how this is deliberate and a suspension, as a means to deter, should not come into play for something that is not plainly intentional.

If step 1 is determining whether or not this was an accident, I don't see how you move past this to step 2.

A suspension doesn't even make sense to me.