[News] Arbitrator reduces Wideman suspension to 10 games from 20

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Aegypticus

Why do you think that? Genuinely interested.

Without reading the full arbitration and the subsequent ruling, the arbitrators substitution of a lesser but severe penalty doesn't jive with an accident. That kind of inconsistency can lead to a judge to overrule an arbitration from my own experience. One of many reasons, of course. But that jumps to mind.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

is Wideman playing tonight?

I'd play him for sure before the NHL change it's mind.

Short of a court injunction I don't think it can "change it's mind".

[Aegypticus]

As an aside, I feel bad for anyone who's dismissing all this because they think they have it figured out one way or another. No matter what "side" you're on, this is some seriously interesting stuff, and bound to get even more so.

[Aegypticus]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Without reading the full arbitration and the subsequent ruling, the arbitrators substitution of a lesser but severe penalty doesn't jive with an accident. That kind of inconsistency can lead to a judge to overrule an arbitration from my own experience. One of many reasons, of course. But that jumps to mind.

So if you were to read the ruling and agree with my personal assessment that the arbitrator thinks he did do it on purpose but reduced the suspension to 10 games because he doesn't think Wideman hit him with intent to injure (this is a pretty gross simplification), would you still think they should go to the courts?

[White Out 403]

Further to my above post, it seems the PA is still banging the drum that this was a pure accident due to concussion. I have to wonder how an arbitrator can cut it down the middle. How do you accept the PA's argument it was an accident caused by a medical incident, yet, still punish him 10 games which is a very heft suspension? Doesn't jive. Either you believe it was an accident or you don't. He should have tossed out the entire suspension if he really believed it to be an accident.

Originally Posted by Aegypticus

So if you were to read the ruling and agree with my personal assessment that the arbitrator thinks he did do it on purpose but reduced the suspension to 10 games because he doesn't think Wideman hit him with intent to injure (this is a pretty gross simplification), would you still think they should go to the courts?

I don't believe that is the case. I only say that because TSN is wording and quoting the ruling differently. However, if that is the language of the ruling, I would suggest the NHL has little recourse

[ZedMan]

Or instead of just tossing questions out there you could read the actual decision:

https://nbcprohockeytalk.files.wordp...hamopinion.pdf

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Aegypticus

Why do you think that? Genuinely interested.

Originally Posted by ZedMan

Or instead of just tossing questions out there you could read the actual decision:

https://nbcprohockeytalk.files.wordp...hamopinion.pdf

I was having issues finding it. Thanks.

[FlamesFanFromBC]

It baffles me why Wideman wasn't allowed to play pending a complete resolution of the appeal process.

If that was the case Bettman and the league certainly wouldn't have dragged the process out and a speedy verdict would have been reached.

Now the league looks like fools for enforcing a suspension that was overturned.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Further to my above post, it seems the PA is still banging the drum that this was a pure accident due to concussion. I have to wonder how an arbitrator can cut it down the middle. How do you accept the PA's argument it was an accident caused by a medical incident, yet, still punish him 10 games which is a very heft suspension? Doesn't jive. Either you believe it was an accident or you don't. He should have tossed out the entire suspension if he really believed it to be an accident.

The ruling follows the NHL's guidelines in punishment. They found that Wideman intentionally struck the linesman (10 games according to the rules) but did not intend injury (the additional 10 games). It's the arbitrator's opinion that Wideman while concussed saw a body and angrily pushed it, but had no intent to injure the linesman




Edit: my god my posts are a spell checked mess

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanFromBC

It baffles me why Wideman wasn't allowed to play pending a complete resolution of the appeal process.

If that was the case Bettman and the league certainly wouldn't have dragged the process out and a speedy verdict would have been reached.

Now the league looks like fools for enforcing a suspension that was overturned.

Both the league and the union would have dragged this out just as much even if Wideman had been allowed to play. This stopped being about Wideman a long time ago for both sides. This was a legal battle.

[Ashasx]

One thing is for certain.

Don't expect any calls to go the Flames way tonight.

[White Out 403]

edit: this is what happens when you skim this crap with a newborn on your knee.

Fair ruling. I have a tough time seeing the NHL form any basis of a legal appeal to a court.

[smiggy77]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Awesome. Reduce the suspension by half after the full term was already served. I get that he will get money back but it's like reducing a jail sentence on the day of the prisoner's full term release. Fantastic process.

Once again, the great American justice system at work.

[sun]

Wow, what an utter and complete gong-show this whole thing has been. Looks like the arbitrator saw things the way some of the homers here saw them. Must be a Flames fan.

[bubbsy]

i don't understand. How did colin cambell's kid become a "teammate" of wideman, as he is the one that received the text message discussed in bettman's ruling???

http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/980...medium=twitter

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

i don't understand. How did colin cambell's kid become a "teammate" of wideman, as he is the one that received the text message discussed in bettman's ruling???

http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/980...medium=twitter

ex teamNOPE...Gary never should have made those public, another dick move for Gar

my bad they were traded for each other

[You Need a Thneed]

I haven't read the whole thread, but the Flames should press the NHL to receive a compensatory 1st round draft pick (something like 31st overall) because they were without a player that should have been allowed to play. The Flames should have a case for something like that.

As for the reduction, I still think 10 games is too much - I think it should have been 0, but could have lived with up to 3, maybe 5 games. I think it's pretty obvious that the whole thing was accidental, and at that point, you determine if Wideman accidentally did something illegal (justifying a suspension of a few games), or accidentally did something legal (obviously no suspension can be given). Some have argued that it "looks" intentional, but if that were the case, what's Wideman's motive? Putting all the pieces together, this being an intentional act just doesn't make sense.

Like some above, I'm confused by the arbitor's ruling. I beleive he was only supposed to rule whether the NHLs ruling was within the boundaries of the NHLs law. If the arbitor ruled that there was intention, he shouldn't have been able to reduce the suspension. And if the arbitor thought the NHL didn't follow its rules, he should have thrown the whole thing out.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by dino7c

ex teammate...Gary never should have made those public, another dick move for Gar

apparently they have never been teammates though

[Tron_fdc]

Get ready for the NHL to show how completely inept it is when the zebras screw the Flames over the rest of the season.

The league is a joke when it comes to stuff like this. It won't just be make up calls, it will be a make up suspension.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

I thought they were teammates in Boston but it turns out they were actually traded for each other in the Horton-Wideman deal. Doesn't seem like they were ever teammates.