I disagree that Wideman had intent. I view it as he saw him last second and the shove was reactionary and accidental. The same as how Joseph didn't intend to trip and hit the ref causing him to fall.
These aren't even remotely comparable. If not the collision with Henderson itself, then the extension of Wideman's arms to contact the linesman arguably is deliberate. The point being that a cogent case can be maade to show at least part of Wideman's actions as intentional. The same cannot at all be said about Curtis Joseph, who very clearly did not deliberately fall into the official.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
These aren't even remotely comparable. If not the collision with Henderson itself, then the extension of Wideman's arms to contact the linesman arguably is deliberate. The point being that a cogent case can be maade to show at least part of Wideman's actions as intentional. The same cannot at all be said about Curtis Joseph, who very clearly did not deliberately fall into the official.
Remember when you said you were done with this but kept coming back to champion your position? You and I don't see eye to eye on this, so feel free to stop replying to me.
Remember when you said you were done with this but kept coming back to champion your position? You and I don't see eye to eye on this, so feel free to stop replying to me.
I said I was done until Tuesday, or once something new transpired. The Stewart piece and the interview with McLennan contained new information today that I thought was relevant and worthy of discussion here.
As for intent, the proof is subjective, or to be determined in the eye of the beholder. Most have have seen fit to enter this discussion in the media seem to be of the same mind here, that this case is unique, and that the video evidence suggests deliberation.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I know this was posted earlier, but I just think hockey players can get a bit of tunnel vision. In this one Weber is coming straight towards Henderson and he explodes into him. I think there are definitely similarities.
Kind of funny that if you view this from the sportsnet video player the caption is that Henderson could not get out of the way of a charging Weber.
This video, it seems more like Henderson has the tunnel vision. Cuts right into Weber's path.
Similar in that Weber absolutely creams him and follows through with his fists (physics) and doesn't appear to apologize or "stop to see if he's okay". I can see why Weber would be cut some slack though in this one vs Wideman's incident. Henderson's maybe fault vs definitely not his fault.
So if the proof is subjective why do you act like your opinion is the only on that is right?
My opinion is that it appeared at the time of the incident, and it appears in the videos of the incident that Wideman's actions were deliberate. I have never made a claim one way or the other whether I think they actually were—how can I know? Moreover, I have been attempting to align myself with how expert observers have interpreted this incident. The vast majority—from former players, to former officials, to various other members of the Hockey Writers Association—have quite consistently come to the same basic conclusion regarding how this incident will be handled.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I know this was posted earlier, but I just think hockey players can get a bit of tunnel vision. In this one Weber is coming straight towards Henderson and he explodes into him. I think there are definitely similarities.
Kind of funny that if you view this from the sportsnet video player the caption is that Henderson could not get out of the way of a charging Weber.
This really isn't much different from the Wideman incident. If I was Wideman I would be using this for any appeals. Seeing Wideman out of the line-up wouldn't normally upset me, but seeing him get suspended, for what I believe was an accident, would be an injustice.
This really isn't much different from the Wideman incident. If I was Wideman I would be using this for any appeals. Seeing Wideman out of the line-up wouldn't normally upset me, but seeing him get suspended, for what I believe was an accident, would be an injustice.
Hitting someone who skates into your lane when you're skating full speed is a vast difference from hitting someone behind as you slowly skate back to the bench.
Hitting someone who skates into your lane when you're skating full speed is a vast difference from hitting someone behind as you slowly skate back to the bench.
I agree that hitting from behind is worse, but watch how Weber defends himself. His hands go up and he pushes off, just like Wideman in defence. I'd even say Weber's push look more violent, and that he had more than ample time to hold up before he crushed him. I'd also like to point out the way Hendersons head hits the ice after this hit, he was lucky to get up.
This is definitely a video I'd be bringing if I was Wideman.
Not a different era at all, actually. Only a few short years. In a way, I respect your dedication to the "Wideman did no wrong" argument. I don't respect at all the "this is only an issue because of social media" argument. If Dennis Wideman had done this 10 years ago, it would still have been a huge controversy, and it still would have resulted in supplemental discipline.
It sucks that Wideman is in this situation, but my definite impression is that tomorrow is going to be a sentencing hearing, not a trial. You might as well start accepting it now.
I am not looking for your respect so no worries...social media plays a part don't kid yourself
The guys who officiated the game did not see fit to give a misconduct and automatic 10 gamer so what the hell changed overnight? There was public outrage and the union made some calls
I already said he is getting 5-10 so I'm not sure what I am supposed to get ready for...really I am ready for the epic meltdown on social media when he gets less than 20
I predict 21 games. 1 game for the actual hit, then 20 extra games to satisfy the public. I really think that the reason they wait a few days to make these rulings is so they can gauge how mad people are.
The NHL should just let the fans vote on the suspension. What's the worst that could happen?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Wormius For This Useful Post:
it is important that the League not budge from their "no tolerance" approach to officials.
What no tolerance approach? There have been at least 4 other videos in this thread that would have been worthy of punishment if there was in fact a no tolerance approach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
These aren't even remotely comparable. If not the collision with Henderson itself, then the extension of Wideman's arms to contact the linesman arguably is deliberate. The point being that a cogent case can be maade to show at least part of Wideman's actions as intentional. The same cannot at all be said about Curtis Joseph, who very clearly did not deliberately fall into the official.
Did Joseph not deliberately skate as fast as he could directly towards the official? I don't believe for a second that he intended to make any contact with him, but he was still responsible for his actions that lead to the incident.
There is no evidence that Wideman intended to do anything (I don't discount that it's possible though).
Lastly, everyone seems to be making a leap from the hit Wideman took to him either having a concussion or no impact from the hit at all. There is a very broad middle ground...have you ever taken a volleyball to the face (or something similar)? Your bell can be rung for 10-60 seconds (possible watery eyes, etc.) without having a concussion, and you can still feel it for a few minutes afterwards, but continue to play. People seem to want to think that 'getting your bell rung' doesn't exist anymore since we know more about concussions, but there is definitely still a big grey area there.
I'm sure that in the 20 seconds following a 'non-concussive bell-ringing incident' one wouldn't perform as well on a visual or physical test. I don't necessarily think this excuses the incident, but that is a likely explanation for them coming together despite Wideman 'skating slowly towards Henderson'
What no tolerance approach? There have been at least 4 other videos in this thread that would have been worthy of punishment if there was in fact a no tolerance approach.
The "no tolerance" of any deliberate contact made with an official. In virtually all other instances, there is a substantial amount of evidence to suggest that in each one, all contact with the official was either accidental or incidental. There is a lot more room for reasonable doubt in the Wideman case.
Quote:
Did Joseph not deliberately skate as fast as he could directly towards the official? I don't believe for a second that he intended to make any contact with him, but he was still responsible for his actions that lead to the incident.
There is very little doubt that the contact between Joseph and the official was anything but accidental. The same cannot be said for Wideman and Henderson.
Quote:
There is no evidence that Wideman intended to do anything (I don't discount that it's possible though).
What everyone continues to miss—and what makes this case exceptional is that Wideman's actions appear to be very plausibly intentional. Not necessarily the initial hit, but the case can certainly be made for the cross check that followed. There is a lot more room for doubt in this instance than in any of the others, which is why the League is taking it so seriously, and rightly so.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I understand the discussion portion but I still vie that Wideman gets some suspension, it will probably be <10 games but we shall see what they decide on. Just like if you "Accidently" hit another car, you weren't intending it but you still have to take responsibility. Just like even if Wideman is "Dazed" or doesn't know what the heck is going on, he still hit and injured an official.
It ends up being a he said she said argument but in reality the panel will have to decide on the legitimacy of his claim of not meaning to do it, but unless someone has seen specifically if he has his eyes closed then it's really hard to determine intent.
To me the most plausible is due to the circumstances to where he was, if he had his eyes closed knowing he's near the Preds bench, at the last second when he instantly reacts to Henderson in front of him he probably blurred the White/Black of Hendersons Jersey to the silver/blue of the Pred's and was hitting a "Predator" in his mind given his lack of reaction after he goes to the bench. But this is speculation on my part and I could totally be wrong.
__________________
"As far as I'm concerned I take it one day at a time because if you look too far down the road that's when you get yourself in trouble. You've gotta enjoy the process and not be burdened by the outcome." - Jon Gillies
Sometimes in a situation like this you have to drop all the details and just ask yourself what makes sense?
Why would Wideman look up and then target a linesman from 100 feet away? It doesn't make any sense.
He is however, a pissy guy from what I've gathered so I do think it's possible that he lost sight of where he was, skated himself into a tight spot, was surprised with it, and still annoyed from getting plastered, reacted badly by shoving the guy out of his way.
So he gets suspended, but tracking his eyes etc seem like a waste of time to me.
Wideman has a perfectly clean record when it comes to supplemental discipline and relatively low penalty minutes over his career. What is the basis for saying he is "pissy"
Wideman has a perfectly clean record when it comes to supplemental discipline and relatively low penalty minutes over his career. What is the basis for saying he is "pissy"
Yeah I'm not really sure where this sentiment came frome, I've read from a couple posters (Not just here) that he's "Pissy" but it just seems like a false statement.
__________________
"As far as I'm concerned I take it one day at a time because if you look too far down the road that's when you get yourself in trouble. You've gotta enjoy the process and not be burdened by the outcome." - Jon Gillies
