Wideman Decision Expected Wednesday

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Slapping your stick is the common signal for "get me off the ice".

It not like he violently slammed his stick with 2 hands, it was just the typically one hander you see when players need a line change.

Your right on that though. I had a bit more of a harsh rememberance of how he slapped his stick. I re watched it and it wasn't as nearly in frustration as I had remembered, for some reason I had thought he slammed it. I still stand by everything I said after. He had several seconds of his head up to see there was going to be a collision and it was completely unnecessary for the shove.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

I can say I do not think it was intentional, because I am not Dennis Wideman, and I am not inside his head. I can only say how I interpret what I saw.

Right. Which is why the decision will come down predominantly on the video evidence, which quite clearly shows Wideman's stick in his hands making contact with Henderson's head, and in a situation that appears quite easily avoidable. Given those circumstances, I would think the language of Rule 40.3 reasonably applies here.

I do not think he deliberately struck Henderson with an intent to injure (Rule 40.2) nor do I think he deliberately applied physical force without an intent to injure (Rule 40.3). I think he tried to get inside, was unaware that Henderson would be skating so fast towards him, and upon what turned into an inevitable collision, extended his arms in a manner of "better you than me".

What you just described was a deliberate application of physical force. What makes this instance so unusual is that there is nothing from the video to suggest that it was simply an unavoidable collision. Wideman definitely takes action to contribute to the injury of the official, and without the ability to determine intent, or to clearly rule it out, the video on its own looks pretty damning.

I heard three former NHL players weigh in on this case on the radio yesterday, and they were emphatic and unanimous about it. We can't know what Wideman was thinking at the time, but his actions deserve a lengthy suspension.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Have you watched the clip? They are both skating in slow motion - any collision would have been inconsequential. He doesn't put his arms up to depend himself, he flattens the guy with a hard cross check. I'm on board with not premeditated, woozy etc. but let's not kid ourselves that he was just protecting himself from a collision.

Yes I have viewed it, many times.
My interpretation has not changed, and I am not kidding anyone.
I opine he reacted to the collision by pushing away. This doesn't necessarily absolve him of responsibility, but I don't make a finding under Rule 40.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by dino7c

you lose all credibility here

Funny it was basically a non issue 2 minutes after it happened with Wideman and the linesman sharing a laugh. They didn't even bring it up in the intermission until Francis decided to get his name out there. After the game hockey guys like Sutter and Button said reactionary he didn't mean to ect. Maybe a game or two MAYBE.!

^^ This ... I blame the media.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Can't vote. I'll say 10 games, uses physical force but no intent to injure.

[Split98]

I change my mind every time I see it. Currently, on the 'accidental' fence. No question there will be a few games for the optics of it, but punishment for the result not the intent.

I'm confused about why we're still talking about him being disoriented though. He said himself he wasn't. He was in shoulder and neck pain and just trying to get off the ice.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by Split98

I change my mind every time I see it. Currently, on the 'accidental' fence. No question there will be a few games for the optics of it, but punishment for the result not the intent.

I'm confused about why we're still talking about him being disoriented though. He said himself he wasn't. He was in shoulder and neck pain and just trying to get off the ice.

He may say he wasn't disorientated but he sure looked woozy after the hit.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right. Which is why the decision will come down predominantly on the video evidence, which quite clearly shows Wideman's stick in his hands making contact with Henderson's head, and in a situation that appears quite easily avoidable. Given those circumstances, I would think the language of Rule 40.3 reasonably applies here.


What you just described was a deliberate application of physical force. What makes this instance so unusual is that there is nothing from the video to suggest that it was simply an unavoidable collision. Wideman definitely takes action to contribute to the injury of the official, and without the ability to determine intent, or to clearly rule it out, the video on its own looks pretty damning.

I heard three former NHL players weigh in on this case on the radio yesterday, and they were emphatic and unanimous about it. We can't know what Wideman was thinking at the time, but his actions deserve a lengthy suspension.

I appreciate your position, and respectfully disagree. The extending of the arms could be deemed the result of incidental contact, and protecting himself therefrom as reactionary, and not deliberate.

Again, I don't think he should be suspended, but suspect he will be.

I anticipate something like this:

The National Hockey League has suspended Dennis Wideman for three games for his actions in a play involving Linesman Don Henderson in a game on January 27, 2016. In interviewing the Player, we appreciate his explanation that he did not see Linesman Henderson, which is indicated by his attempt to move his feet out of the way of the collision at the last moment. However, while we do not feel there was any intent to injure Linesman Henderson, the extension of the arms was an unnecessary portion of the collision, which resulted in further chance at injury, and ultimately the player is responsible for this push after the original incidental contact. Based upon the fact that Dennis Wideman is not a repeat offender, that this was accidental contact, but that Dennis Wideman is ultimately responsible for his reaction which resulted in Linesman Henderson colliding with the boards, we have suspended Dennis Wideman for three games.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right. Which is why the decision will come down predominantly on the video evidence, which quite clearly shows Wideman's stick in his hands making contact with Henderson's head, and in a situation that appears quite easily avoidable. Given those circumstances, I would think the language of Rule 40.3 reasonably applies here.

He hit him in the head now? And clearly?

Wideman is shorter than Henderson, and his knees are slightly bent when the contact happens. Wideman's arms never go over his shoulders, so how could he cross check him in the head?

[timbit]

Extremely difficult call to make.
However, I do believe that when the Today Show has replays of the incident as one of its top stories the following morning and Matt Lauer is aghast that it happened, that the NHL office will need a pretty substantial and provable ( believable) rebuttal from Wideman.
The NHL is very sensitive in regards to their public image in the USA.
Hoping for the best, prepared for the worst.

[powderjunkie]

I suspect people on this board have watched the replays 10x more than anyone else out there who is spouting their opinion, so I think the 50/50 split in opinions here is based more on consideration/review than homerism. I know my first view was "WTF that looks bad", but each time I watched it again it made less and less sense and looked more like an accident.

It's a shame we don't have any angles showing his eyes and facial expression in the seconds leading to the incident.

Also, I think any post including the words 'obviously' or 'clearly' lose all legitimacy; the only this clear about this situation is that nothing is obvious.

[GioforPM]

Can't vote, it seems. I'd say zero except for the publicity. If they are affected by that at all, it's 3-5.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Can't vote, it seems. I'd say zero except for the publicity. If they are affected by that at all, it's 3-5.

They are affected this is the NHL we are talking about...the official and player had a quick chat about 5 mins after the incident and there didn't seem to be any animosity at all. Being at the game you would hardly even know anything happened but then the social media.

I bet he gets 10 and appeals it down to 7...not at all saying that is what I think he SHOULD get

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

I appreciate your position, and respectfully disagree. The extending of the arms could be deemed the result of incidental contact, and protecting himself therefrom as reactionary, and not deliberate.

I think your explanation is pretty close to what happened, but I don't believe that with all the exposure this has received, and with the fact that the NHL will want to demonstrate their diligence to protect officials, the suspension will be less than ten games. Optics play a big role in this, and they are going to have a major impact.

I agree that the contact with Henderson was probably incidental, but do not think that the extension of the arms was entirely reactionary. I also think it is more difficult to demonstrate from the video that it was reactionary. Especially now, having listened to a few former players speak on this, I cannot accept that Wideman is without culpability here. They're unanimity about Wideman's responsibility for his actions is very compelling.

[dino7c]

The officials are allowed to look at an incident after the game and give him the automatic 10 gamer, they chose not to

[Textcritic]

Let's also not forget that rightly or wrongly, the NHL is better served to come down hard on this, as it then helps to set a precedent for future cases in which players invoke the excuse that "it was just an accident." Lots of times, it clearly is. But in cases where this is not obvious, the most responsible course of action is to come out on the side of player safety.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

He hit him in the head now? And clearly?

Wideman is shorter than Henderson, and his knees are slightly bent when the contact happens. Wideman's arms never go over his shoulders, so how could he cross check him in the head?

Fine. After having watched the incident live, several times after it had just occurred when I couldn't believe what I had just seen, and dozens of times in the past couple days, to me, Wideman's hands and his stick look pretty clearly to make contact at head-level. But you are right, I should probably have said something more along the lines of, "the video quite clearly shows Wideman's stick in his hands making contact with Henderson in a vulnerable area, at or near his head."

It doesn't really change much of the outcome.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think your explanation is pretty close to what happened, but I don't believe that with all the exposure this has received, and with the fact that the NHL will want to demonstrate their diligence to protect officials, the suspension will be less than ten games. Optics play a big role in this, and they are going to have a major impact.

I agree that the contact with Henderson was probably incidental, but do not think that the extension of the arms was entirely reactionary. I also think it is more difficult to demonstrate from the video that it was reactionary. Especially now, having listened to a few former players speak on this, I cannot accept that Wideman is without culpability here. They're unanimity about Wideman's responsibility for his actions is very compelling.

I can appreciate and understand your take.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Fine. After having watched the incident live, several times after it had just occurred when I couldn't believe what I had just seen, and dozens of times in the past couple days, to me, Wideman's hands and his stick look pretty clearly to make contact at head-level. But you are right, I should probably have said something more along the lines of, "the video quite clearly shows Wideman's stick in his hands making contact with Henderson in a vulnerable area, at or near his head."

It doesn't really change much of the outcome.

But this is just an example about how something can be twisted around and made to seem worse than it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj4PoDrqv-E
I tried to pause the video as close to point of contact as I could (would post a picture if I knew how). At the 33 second mark where contact happens the stick is almost vertical, but slightly on a right diagonal. You can see Wideman's right hand almost in line with his shoulder, just slightly higher. You can't see his left hand, but judging how he was holding his stick before contact it would be just about chest level, his hands are pretty close together.

It looks like there is very little space between Wideman's body and Henderson's body, which is when Wideman pushes off. I don't think there was a huge amount of force from the push, but obviously when you get pushed from behind not expecting it there doesn't need to be a lot of force.

[dino7c]

About 50% of people on social media I have seen post think he was mad about a non-call so hit the REF

shows how stupid people are