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

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Am I the only one that thinks this text is being taken totally out of context? People seem to be assuming he means those direct refs in that game rather than the ref's union as a whole... who were most likely advocating he be given the maximum possible suspension.

So him saying that the media and Ref's Union are the reason he is in this position is totally reasonable to say. It doesn't mean he wasn't remorseful for what happened to that linesman... It just means he's frustrated that the Ref's Union is pushing for such a huge punishment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The text really has nothing to do with it for me, I feel he had already buried himself with his explanations well before we ever knew about the text. That and the video evidence. I am sure it doesn't help though but for me as an outside person looking at it all the text means nothing one way or another. I guess to Bettman it does.

[socalwingfan]

Wow Burke was pretty upset - he made a lot of great points though. I would love to see Burke debate Bettman on this decision.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

You can choose not to believe Wideman, but not seeing the ref until the last second and "not registering" after the hit is entirely consistent.

No it isn't. As a matter of fact the one thing that has been a constant is how inconsistent Wideman has been about the whole thing. There is nothing on the video to suggest that he did not see the linesman until the last second either.

[Yanda]

3 quick things of note:
- Wideman should be suspended even if it was accidental. 10 Games was enough.
- This is more about the league setting a precidence about "I was Concussed" not being an excuse in future incidents.
- The Text message changes nothing for me. Anyone should be allowed to vent when situations dont go your way behind closed doors. Its really underhanded by the league to try to use that as evidence to incriminate him like he doesnt care, because he obviously does and this incident pretty much ruined his career.

I think the context of the text message is that it was truly accidental and that if there was no injury or if contact wasnt so reactionary then it wouldnt be a story because of the media. Then because the NHL has to defend there Ref's he got over-disciplined.

[Yanda]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No it isn't. As a matter of fact the one thing that has been a constant is how inconsistent Wideman has been about the whole thing. There is nothing on the video to suggest that he did not see the linesman until the last second either.

Well he did turn his skate at the very last second, I honestly think this is the first time he actually see's the Ref. Even though hes looking forward I dont think hes paying attention, which still puts him at fault. He deserves some sort of punishment. If Henderson wasnt hurt its likely not even a story. Whats bad is that Wideman finished the game despite being "concussed", which is bad for the league, the team and the player.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

I don't think him saying: "I was out of it and don't really know what happened there" is mutually exclusive from the stance of "it was an accident". To me, those two ideas are in line with each other and make sense. The narrative reads "I was a bit out of it, and I think I ran into someone by accident on my way to the bench"..

His stance though wasn't that it was just an accident and wasn't sure what happened. He said that he tried to avoid the collision last minute.

In addition, I do not credit Mr. Wideman's
testimony. In particular, I do not credit his testimony that he tried to avoid the linesman at the last
minute.

In another interview after the play:

“And I was kind of keeled over and at the last second, I looked up and I saw him and I couldn’t avoid it.”

Wideman, during his testimony and to the press, was suggesting that it was just an accident and he didn't see the linesman until it was too late, indicating that he does recall the event. At least that's what it appears to suggest pretty clearly.

But the concussion experts, who Wideman had talked to and suggested that he didn't "register" the event and didn't even recall who he hit are not the same thing. These are mutually exclusive events.

[Fire]

If the NHL can't handle a appeal in a timely manner they should let players play during a suspension. I hope the NHLPA goes hard after the NHL about this issue.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

You can choose not to believe Wideman, but not seeing the ref until the last second and "not registering" after the hit is entirely consistent.

Which Wideman should I believe?

The one who vaguely remembers going to the bench and an incident happening but doesn't remember who or how he hit someone?

Or the Wideman who recalls the event and looked up last second and hit the linesman but apologized for it right after?

[heep223]

This whole season has been a gongshow. Kind of entertaining in a sense.

Must be such a distraction for the team

[saXon]

The NHL has been a gongshow since it entered the 2010's. Disappointing really.

It used to be the NBA that was the gongshow.

[schmaaadm]

I just can't see how people can think it was intentional. I don't personally know Dennis, but he can't be that stupid to intentionally cross check a linesman.
Also if he was actually concussed, that could be why his story is changing. I've had my share of concussions in hockey. It always seemed like your memory of the incident slowly pieces together over time. You start to remember what actually happened - in my experience anyways.

[sureLoss]

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Okay, here is the explanation...

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Because this is an arbitration hearing -- basically a private court -- neither side can say no to this kind of a request (more)...

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Provided information isn't privileged, both sides have to provide written communications from witnesses.

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
So, if someone wanted Don Henderson's texts messages, they had to be turned over, as well. And they were. That's the explanation.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by schmaaadm

I've had my share of concussions in hockey. It always seemed like your memory of the incident slowly pieces together over time. You start to remember what actually happened - in my experience anyways.

Interesting because it would appear the opposite happened to Wideman. He recalled the event in discussion with media shortly after the incident, but it was days after he was talking to the expert and his memory seemed to fade.

[sureLoss]

nm

[Flash Walken]

Oling Roachinen cutting to the heart of the issue.

Wideman was dishonest and lacked remorse as far as the league is concerned. Based on his dishonesty they do not believe the concussion he may or may not have suffered played a mitigating role, and his conduct following the incident was less than apologetic.

I don't see how an arbitrator is going to give him less games. Pretty compelling argument from the perspective of the league.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Weitz

So Wideman and Treliving didn't even ask for a reduction? Just a straight no suspension?

That seems crazy to me.

The NHLPA appealed this, not Treliving.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

You are missing him trying to avoid Henderson at the last minute, an indication he didn't see him until then and that therefore it was an accident. That's how I saw it even before his story.

The one problem with that, is if Wideman hit the linesman accidentally and tried to avoid him at the last second, then why wasn't that the entirety of his defense? I don't want to call a Flames player a liar but Wideman has a couple of different explanations of what happened, which is not a good look IMO.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

The one who vaguely remembers going to the bench and an incident happening but doesn't remember who or how he hit someone?

Where does he say this?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Okay, here is the explanation...

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Because this is an arbitration hearing -- basically a private court -- neither side can say no to this kind of a request (more)...

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Provided information isn't privileged, both sides have to provide written communications from witnesses.

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
So, if someone wanted Don Henderson's texts messages, they had to be turned over, as well. And they were. That's the explanation.

I was wondering on Reddit if this was an arbitration law thing. Nice to see that was confirmed.

[N-E-B]

That decision should not have taken this long. That's a joke. I couldn't agree more with Burke on this one.