[News] Bettman upholds 20 game Wideman suspension. NHLPA files appeal to neutral arbitrator

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Not following proper concussion protocol.

What about the NHL official? he is apparently hurt really badly considering he hasn't been back yet. Why did he get right back up and drop the puck? Who is taking care of this guy?

[Krule]

After reading all 15 pages on this particular topic (because I have nothing better to do at work today LOL) I'd like to thank everyone for their OPINIONS on what has transpired to date. I have watched the video more times than I'd care to admit and I am not going to rehash everyone's opinion on that. I have my own. I'll leave it at that.

I have to say that while I do agree with the suspension, a ref needs to be protected no matter the circumstance, but the manner in which the NHL dishes out discipline is totally inconsistent. We have all seen the video evidence for collisions between refs vs. players and players vs. players that have not received any or very little media coverage. Not to mention no disciplinary actions taken by the NHL. I also have to agree that will be a precedent setting case with relation to concussion protocol and is no longer an issue between Wideman and the NHL, but an ongoing battle between the NHLPA and the NHL.

I also think something is being missed here too. Firstly, the Flames dropped the ball. It has always been my opinion that relying on the player, in this case Wideman, to confirm whether he is concussed or not to the doctor is a mistake. Take that out of the equation and make the standard protocol that he be sent to the quiet room for a period of required time for evaluation, since he clearly had some issues on the bench. (My opinion)

Secondly, the officials also dropped the ball. Henderson clearly had problems gathering himself off the ice after the collision too. Yet, there is no mention that he should also be following the same concussion protocol. IMHO, he should have been examined as well and sent to the quiet room for assessment. It's not like there was never a game played without the 4th official. We find out the following day that he spent the night at the hospital.

I think the rules for concussion protocol, if everyone concerned was serious about this issue, would apply to everyone on the ice, no matter the uniform. The opportunity to improve the protocols should be paramount in any discussion going forward.

[powderjunkie]

^ the league and more importantly PA dropped the ball, not really the Flames. Just as Wideman doesn't want to take himself out, the team doesn't want to either. The PA and league need to help the players and teams protect themselves from themselves through stronger policy and oversight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah that's what's eating me too.

Pages of people arguing two very extreme positions and then a guy here and there yelling homer if people disagree with them. Such a stupid comment.

This whole thing is odd to me, but in it are a bunch of truths (or at least what I believe to be true) that don't all line up on the same side to me ... so I don't see it as black or white.

-Wideman got hit
-Wideman looked to not see the guy was in his road until the last second.
-Wideman made a ######bag move by pushing the guy in anger (guessing pissed off from the hit)
-Wideman deserves to be suspended for the reaction.
-His reaction was similar to the surprised push Weber gave the same linesman
-The NHL has treated this like he rose to his feet and then planned and attacked an official
-The NHL in fearing PR reaction has handled this poorly
-The NHL in fearing the NFL concussion mess is handling this poorly
-The NHL dragged their feet on this for fear of not looking serious
-This appears to be more a NHLPA/NHL battle now for the first contested suspension since the new rules.
-The NHL may wish they didn't get into text messages

The guy is a suck, pissed that he got hit, surprised by an official and annoyed that he was in his way and shoved him. The league in fear of looking lenient has gone overboard and made a mess of things.

Bingo I think your assessment of the situation is pretty much right on, other than the one part I bolded. If the NHL truly thought that way, I believe the punishment would have been (and should have been) more severe. Half a season maybe. So I can live with the 20 games for an instantaneous emotional reaction. The officials are off limits, period.

Also, Wideman is a suck?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Bingo I think your assessment of the situation is pretty much right on, other than the one part I bolded. If the NHL truly thought that way, I believe the punishment would have been (and should have been) more severe. Half a season maybe. So I can live with the 20 games for an instantaneous emotional reaction. The officials are off limits, period.

Also, Wideman is a suck?

There is a strange disconnect though. The NHL has to be treating it as intentional, and I believe Bettman's statement yesterday confirms that, because otherwise this whole "officials are off limits" thing would mean nothing. I say that because accidental contact is clearly ok with the NHL. The league has never suspended players for accidental plays, even punches. To the face!

I'm actually a bit surprised at how many media personalities keep on getting this so, so wrong (looking at you Duha). They go on and on and on about how officials are off limits and this has no place in the game and on the other hand totally ignore the fact that if a player ever did clearly and intentionally skate over to a ref and crosscheck him in the back they would get far more than 20 games. Look at previous suspensions. Guys have gotten 10 games just for the slightest shove.

If the league actually believes it was intentional, which I think is crazy, then they totally screwed this up because he should have received half a season. The idea that the league is saying that you can attack a referee and only get 20 games is mind blowing.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

There is a strange disconnect though. The NHL has to be treating it as intentional, and I believe Bettman's statement yesterday confirms that, because otherwise this whole "officials are off limits" thing would mean nothing. I say that because accidental contact is clearly ok with the NHL. The league has never suspended players for accidental plays, even punches. To the face!

I'm actually a bit surprised at how many media personalities keep on getting this so, so wrong (looking at you Duha). They go on and on and on about how officials are off limits and this has no place in the game and on the other hand totally ignore the fact that if a player ever did clearly and intentionally skate over to a ref and crosscheck him in the back they would get far more than 20 games. Look at previous suspensions. Guys have gotten 10 games just for the slightest shove.

If the league actually believes it was intentional, which I think is crazy, then they totally screwed this up because he should have received half a season. The idea that the league is saying that you can attack a referee and only get 20 games is mind blowing.

I think there is a difference between a reactionary hit vs. a planned hit. IMO both are intentional (insofar as they are not accidents) but the latter deserves an even stiffer penalty.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

My point has always been that, seeing as that the primary defence was Wideman suffering a concussion, Wideman had reason to play up his concussion symptoms to the doctors. And I believe that's exactly what happened. The doctors should have been aware of that and made an effort to try and determine if Wideman was telling the truth. Certainly not an easy task, but even a little bit of due diligence would have had them asking the medical staff who examined him at the game. Questioning why he said he wasn't woozy after the hit to the media. Etc.

A few possibilities: Wideman didn't think he was concussed...as has been discussed we can't rely on the patient to self diagnose. He did indicate that his neck and shoulder were sore - I suspect those symptoms were more prevalent and he may not have been as aware of what was happening with his head. People tend to be most aware of their most painful injuries...

His interpretation of 'woozy' may differ from others - to me woozy would involve more of a stomach/nausea/dizzy type symptoms in addition to head being off. 'Dazed' seems more specific to the head to me. Can we all agree that he was at least 'unsettled' for a few seconds after the hit? No one can know exactly what that specifically entailed.

If he did lie, I would find it more believable that it was the denial immediately after the game, as that is what players tend to do, to keep themselves in the lineup, and avoid an negative light on the trainers if he realizes that he should have gone back for treatment. I don't think he would try to mastermind some ruse to trick the doctor into thinking he was concussed.

Obviously I don't believe there are any valid inconsistencies in his stories, but even if there were, I think they are explainable (see above). Even if all you said was true in terms of deceit, I think it is about as relevant as the text to this whole thing...

More on the term woozy - I don't remember hearing it in the scrum (unless it was where Wideman answered about his neck and shoulder - I'll have to watch again when I get home), but it does sound like the question was asked. Anyways, I'm not aware of the word 'woozy' ever coming out of Wideman's mouth, yet it has been used dozens of times in the media and in these discussions. This is some of the purplemonleysishwashering I'm talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robbob]

In the NHL video on the suspension they state that it was intentional and forceful.

[The Voice of Reason]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

There is a strange disconnect though. The NHL has to be treating it as intentional, and I believe Bettman's statement yesterday confirms that, because otherwise this whole "officials are off limits" thing would mean nothing. I say that because accidental contact is clearly ok with the NHL. The league has never suspended players for accidental plays, even punches. To the face!

I'm actually a bit surprised at how many media personalities keep on getting this so, so wrong (looking at you Duha). They go on and on and on about how officials are off limits and this has no place in the game and on the other hand totally ignore the fact that if a player ever did clearly and intentionally skate over to a ref and crosscheck him in the back they would get far more than 20 games. Look at previous suspensions. Guys have gotten 10 games just for the slightest shove.

If the league actually believes it was intentional, which I think is crazy, then they totally screwed this up because he should have received half a season. The idea that the league is saying that you can attack a referee and only get 20 games is mind blowing.

Did you read his statement? Bettman addressed that specific topic (previous player/official physical contact).

He notes that it's "unquestionably true" that "accidents sometimes occur on the ice, and that the collisions between players and officials in those other incidents did not result in supplementary discipline."

He goes on to say "Each of the incidents referred to by the NHLPA involved collisions that occurred in the midst of play - presumably in the full view of the on-ice officials, who did not call a penalty. Here, by contrast, no penalty was called because the incident occurred away from the play and none of the on-ice officials witnessed it. The incident here did not involve anything that remotely resembled a 'hockey play'"

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

Did you read his statement? Bettman addressed that specific topic (previous player/official physical contact).

He notes that it's "unquestionably true" that "accidents sometimes occur on the ice, and that the collisions between players and officials in those other incidents did not result in supplementary discipline."

He goes on to say "Each of the incidents referred to by the NHLPA involved collisions that occurred in the midst of play - presumably in the full view of the on-ice officials, who did not call a penalty. Here, by contrast, no penalty was called because the incident occurred away from the play and none of the on-ice officials witnessed it. The incident here did not involve anything that remotely resembled a 'hockey play'"

I referenced Bettman's release so obviously yes, I did read some of it.

But I'm not sure what your getting at...My point still stands.

[The Voice of Reason]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I referenced Bettman's release so obviously yes, I did read some of it.

But I'm not sure what your getting at...My point still stands.

Yeah, I realize that now. I think I misread of the tone of your comment earlier. My bad.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Anyways, I'm not aware of the word 'woozy' ever coming out of Wideman's mouth, yet it has been used dozens of times in the media and in these discussions. This is some of the purplemonleysishwashering I'm talking about.

I'm not trying to be rude, by why not just read the order at this point? It's 20 pages, double spaced, it doesn't take long at all. Immediately attacking anything as "purplemonleysishwashering" that you disagree with is asinine when the information is coming directly from the order.

I note that Mr. Wideman gave a post-game interview in which he essentially denied having been "woozy. "
Mr. Wideman testified at the hearing that he had been instructed to give a misleading answer if asked about his
condition and that he followed that instruction. (Tr. 61-62, 84-85)

[mrkajz44]

So the hearing is not until next week? This has to be the slowest "expedited process" of all time. A final ruling will likely not occur until 1 month after the incident occurred. It's like the NHL is measuring their speed based on the cosmic calendar or something.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I don't think he would try to mastermind some ruse to trick the doctor into thinking he was concussed.

The most obvious answer, as clearly tiptoed around in the order by Bettman, was that Wideman exaggerated his symptoms to the doctor to ensure that he was diagnosed with a concussion and the doctors were glad to accept it because that's pretty much their job as the expert witnesses for the NHLPA. I'm not suggesting that Wideman wasn't concussed, or that he thought he wasn't concussed, just that he knew the right answers to give to ensure that he got the correct diagnosis from the doctors when interviewed 4 days after the event. By telling the experts that he vaguely remembers what happened, saying that he was was woozy despite his previous claim etc. He knew the experts would testify that he was concussed (which I'm not arguing against) and explain away his behaviour. Had he told them the same story he told the media, they may not have been so quick to diagnosis him with concussion and the behavioural symptoms that come with it.

Those conclusions were based on little more than Mr. Wideman's own
subjective report of concussion symptoms that he may or may not have actually experienced.

Rather, both were retained by the NHLPA (for whom each
has performed services for many years) for the purpose of opining as to what his mental and/or physical
state was at the time of the incident in question. In order to do so, they relied on remote, brief
interviews with Mr. Wideman conducted several days after the incident (at a time when he was well
aware that he was the subject of an imminent supplementary discipline hearing) and their own review
of the video footage.

And. . . you didn't do anything to kind of test out whether what he was telling
you might not be the case, did you?
A. That's correct.
Q. You simply accepted it at face value?
A. Yes.
15
Q. And you would agree with me that Mr. Wideman certainly had, at least
potentially, the motive to exaggerate his symptoms in order to obtain a report that
said he wasn't responsible for his actions, that's at least a possibility, isn't it?
A. It's a possibility.
. . and you didn't discuss that in your report, did you?
A. No. (Tr. 137-138, 141)

As noted above, Drs. Comper and Kutcher both simply took what Mr.
Wideman told them at face value. They could have, but did not, seek to corroborate his
statements by speaking with the Club's medical trainer, who was not consulted by either Dr.
Comper or Dr. Kutcher or asked by the NHLPA to testify at the hearing about Mr. Wideman's
supposed "confusional state.

Dr. Kutcher testified that he based his opinion, in part, on the fact that Mr. Wideman told him
that he "vaguely remembers skating to the bench. He remembers some incident occurring, but
he does not recall who he hit [or] how he hit the individual. " (Tr. 203) In fact, however, at the
hearing, Mr. Wideman testified that he does recall colliding with the linesman and that he
became aware it was going to occur prior to contact being made. (Tr. 86)

do note,
however, that Mr. Wideman's testimony on this point (which, like the rest of what he had to say, was
accepted unquestioningly by the NHLPA's experts) is inconsistent with Dr. Kutcher's suggestion that he
lacked "situational awareness."

You don't really need to read between the lines here. While Bettman has vested interests when it comes to the concussion issue, it's clear they weren't buying what Wideman sold to the doctors.

[sureLoss]

Dreger on TSN says that the players and agents are very unhappy that Bettman shared Wideman's text.

Claims that this may strain the relationship between the NHL and PA

[Psytic]

I don't get it. Apple can't give access to a terrorist gunman's phone so the FBi can see his messages. But the NHL has access to Dennis Widemans?????

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I'm not trying to be rude, by why not just read the order at this point? It's 20 pages, double spaced, it doesn't take long at all. Immediately attacking anything as "purplemonleysishwashering" that you disagree with is asinine when the information is coming directly from the order.

Been out all day, going to read it tonight. Of course I'll have healthy skepticism considering the source; the hearing transcripts would be better, but I'm sure much more time consuming!

I note that Mr. Wideman gave a post-game interview in which he essentially denied having been "woozy. "
Mr. Wideman testified at the hearing that he had been instructed to give a misleading answer if asked about his
condition and that he followed that instruction. (Tr. 61-62, 84-85)

This quote is paraphrase, not an actual quote/statement (note the word essentially). I don't doubt that it's probably more or less true/accurate, but as we have seen Bettman is pushing his agenda, not writing an objective, unbiased wholly fact based account.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Psytic

I don't get it. Apple can't give access to a terrorist gunman's phone so the FBi can see his messages. But the NHL has access to Dennis Widemans?????

The terrorists are dead so they can't access their phone.

Dennis Wideman had to unlock and give his up...and he can do that (since he's alive haha).

[sureLoss]

McDonagh, 1st game back from a concussion, gets a blatant headshot from Komarov. Doesn't go to quiet room.

Broken concussion protocol indeed.

[saillias]

He got off the ice without smoking a ref so they're already one step ahead of the Flames