Wideman Decision Expected Wednesday

[Meers]

I'm thinking 20 games.

[flamesfever]

There is no way can I see Wideman intentionally injure a referee. I believe the announcer got it right, that Wideman misjudged the the movement of the referee, and lifted his arms to avoid a collision. This could be explained partly by Wideman's dazed state due to being injured along the boards. IMO a suspension would be unjust, especially in this day and age, with the tendency of people in the social media to overreact.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I honestly feel like I'm taking crazy pills. The way this is being treated feels like this is the worst thing to happen in hockey in decades.

If Wideman gets 20 games for something that is extremely difficult to prove intent for, then I'll be blown away.

This is Dennis Wideman, not Raffi Torres...

Nm double post

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Oh, well that's not good for Wideman.

[flamesfever]

double post

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Multiple videos showing player/official collisions have proven that they aren't untouchable when it is an accident...

Well, that's just it, isn't it? These are multiple incidents which we are virtually certain were accidental, and the response to this rather emphatically demonstrates that the same level of certainty does not extend to Wideman here.

[transplant99]

as "sure" as many on here are claiming that Wideman saw Henderson "long enough" before there was contact...can I ask those of you...how do you know that?

When I first saw it, and the numerable times since, I cannot fathom how one would come to such a conclusion.

In fact it was precisely the opposite for me...it looks like he saw him at the last possible second and braced himself for contact by raising his hands....something players are taught from pee wee.

I didn't think this would even be a second thought after the game last night, never mind what it has morphed into, but without a doubt there will be a suspension of some kind now just because of the furor over it all.

the NHL sure knows how to fumble the PR side of absolutely anything.

[Grimbl420]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

If the NHL can't show he was acting with intent, then the next best thing I see them trying to prove is that he acted with disregard for his surroundings and the safety of others on the ice surface. But I have no idea if there is any rule or clause covering such actions.

I think due to the fact that Wideman was 10 seconds removed from a scary shot to the head and unstable on his feet will work in his favour on this.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I honestly feel like I'm taking crazy pills. The way this is being treated feels like this is the worst thing to happen in hockey in decades.

If Wideman gets 20 games for something that is extremely difficult to prove intent for, then I'll be blown away.

This is Dennis Wideman, not Raffi Torres...

Considering Raffi got 41 games in the fall its just the worst thing in the last 3 months not the worst thing in decades.

Even if Wideman truly didnt intend to hit the Linesman like that the bottom line is he did and the optics were pretty bad from the one camera angle to gauge it from. The league pretty much has to give him a sizeable suspension.

Its a really tough break for him.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Multiple videos showing player/official collisions have proven that they aren't untouchable when it is an accident.

If they can't prove he did it on purpose, which rule 40.whatever requires, then I don't see how they have anything to suspend him. I can't find any superseding clause stating all players must refrain from stupidly running into people.

If the NHL can't show he was acting with intent, then the next best thing I see them trying to prove is that he acted with disregard for his surroundings and the safety of others on the ice surface. But I have no idea if there is any rule or clause covering such actions.

I think you've got in completely backwards.

The raw video shows that Wideman skated 80 feet towards the linesman with an unobstructed view, made barely any effort to avoid him prior to contact, and showed no apologetic reaction immediately after contact.

Many people in this thread have given their version of factors that could have caused him to do those things innocently, and I don't necessarily disagree with them, but it doesn't change the fact that it's up to Wideman to convince the league and officials rep that those factors were in fact present.

[Samonadreau]

At this point its up to Wideman to make a case for his innocence and not up to the league to prove intent.

[HOWITZER]

Probably already been posted, but I chuckled a little when I saw the boards behind the linesman in this photo.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I think you've got in completely backwards.

The raw video shows that Wideman skated 80 feet towards the linesman with an unobstructed view, made barely any effort to avoid him prior to contact, and showed no apologetic reaction immediately after contact.

Many people in this thread have given their version of factors that could have caused him to do those things innocently, and I don't necessarily disagree with them, but it doesn't change the fact that it's up to Wideman to convince the league and officials rep that those factors were in fact present.

John Buccigross Verified account ‏@Buccigross John Buccigross Retweeted Tom Nieto
So, if I punched you in the face at Arby's, my punishment should be determined by my immediate reaction? #beef

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by saillias

John Buccigross Verified account ‏@Buccigross John Buccigross Retweeted Tom Nieto
So, if I punched you in the face at Arby's, my punishment should be determined by my immediate reaction? #beef

It would sure as he** go a long way to inferring your intent, or lack thereof, in punching me, and intent is at the heart of the matter here.

[Grimbl420]

Originally Posted by Mike F

The raw video shows that Wideman skated 80 feet towards the linesman with an unobstructed view, made barely any effort to avoid him prior to contact, and showed no apologetic reaction immediately after contact.

The raw video shows Wideman take a brutal shot to the head and have trouble on his skates just seconds before he hit Henderson. That has to factor in here. I'm not entirly sure Wideman knew where he was, and it definitely is on the NHL to prove otherwise. It's innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Grimbl420

The raw video shows Wideman take a brutal shot to the head and have trouble on his skates just seconds before he hit Henderson. That has to factor in here. I'm not entirly sure Wideman knew where he was, and it definitely is on the NHL to prove otherwise. It's innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.

When there's video of you committing an offense, and there's no doubt he plowed into a linesman and never looked back, you had better put on a defense.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Grimbl420

The raw video shows Wideman take a brutal shot to the head and have trouble on his skates just seconds before he hit Henderson. That has to factor in here. I'm not entirly sure Wideman knew where he was, and it definitely is on the NHL to prove otherwise. It's innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.

Wideman himself said he wasnt dazed at all and just buggered his neck and shoulder up when hit. When there is a video of him basically lunging toward the linesman to hit him and not phased skating away and after you say you werent dazed or confised you are starting an uphill battle.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by getbak

Actually... Double-checking the CBA, it looks like player salary forfeited due to suspensions does not count against the cap...

As a follow-up to this, before anyone gets too excited about the massive cap savings, because Wideman is a first-time offender, any salary he forfeits will be based on losing one "day's" salary for every game he's suspended. A day's salary is calculated by dividing the player's annual salary by the number of games in the NHL regular season.

This season is 186 days long, so one day's salary for Wideman is $28,225.81. Even if he gets a 20 game suspension, it would only be a cap saving of a little over a half a million.


If he was considered a repeat offender, then the forfeiture would be one game's salary per game suspended (1/82 of his annual salary).



Also, there were some comments on Twitter that if he's suspended for any length of time, it could open the door for a Nakladal recall. I don't believe that's the case.

Without an additional injury on the blueline, they won't be able to recall anyone without going into a roster emergency, which is if you have less than 6 defencemen available to play due to a suspension to a player on your active roster. Even without Wideman, the Flames still have 6 healthy d-men (Gio, Brodie, Dougie, Russell, Smid, and Engelland). AFAIK, a suspended player still counts against the team's roster limit and you don't get to replace him like you do with a player on the IR.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

They will still carry 7 defensemen IMO, unless it's a short suspension. They'll just send Granlund down.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

Rob Brown and Bryan Trottier on Fan 960 now with Rob Kerr. When asked about the Wideman incident they stated that they view this a serious incident and expect 20 games minimum for Wideman. They give little leash to Wideman on this.

They questioned why Wideman didn't stop to see if the linesman was okay. They went further to say that it looks bad when he skated around him after the hit and went to the bench acting as if nothing happened.

It will look bad for the NHL if Wideman isn't suspended.