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

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

I'm just saying the arbitrator is not influenced by the NHLs legal concerns surrounding concussions. The guy doesn't work for the league or has a care in the world as to what happens to the NHL

No of course not. I never suggested that. But the lengthy delay in them coming to a decision goes to emphasis that this was not a clear cut obvious decision.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

No of course not. I never suggested that. But the lengthy delay in them coming to a decision goes to emphasis that this was not a clear cut obvious decision.

More people on the "suspend him for a long time" side were of the view that it was clear cut and obvious than those who thought "accidental" IMO.

I've seen court decisions over a lot more money than this take way less time. Especially when it was a pressing issue.

The amount of time suggests to me it will be upheld, because otherwise there'd be urgency.

[Oling_Roachinen]

And let's not overlook the effect that allowing Wideman to play would have.

Let's say that Wideman was allowed to play during the appeal process. And let's say that the Flames were in the playoff race. And let's say that Wideman was a contributing team to said-playoff-bound Flames. Use your imagination.

Now if the arbitrator took his time and came back and upheld the 20 game suspension? He's not playing in the playoffs now...People would lose their ####ing minds.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Don't care. The NHL made a discaplinary decision and the appeal process has dragged on to the point that by the time it's resolved the (lengthy) suspension will have been served regardless of the decision of the arbitrator.

That's incompetent.

If the NHL wants to have an appeal process that can take this long then fine... allow the player to play pending appeal... but it's patently absurd the way it's done now.

Deciding to use Wideman as a precedent for abuse of officials is the really baffling part.

Carcillo (a repeat offender no less) got half the games Wideman did for intentionally abusing a ref.

Its just madness at this point. If 20 is ruled by the third party, fine.

Lucic punches one in the face by accident, Weber smashes into the same linesman that Wideman does. Brendan Smith crosschecks a ref in the back, Muzzin elbows one from behind. All this season, all zero games.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

And let's not overlook the effect that allowing Wideman to play would have.

Let's say that Wideman was allowed to play during the appeal process. And let's say that the Flames were in the playoff race. And let's say that Wideman was a contributing team to said-playoff-bound Flames. Use your imagination.

Now if the arbitrator took his time and came back and upheld the 20 game suspension? He's not playing in the playoffs now...People would lose their ####ing minds.

No, because that would be the decision, not an absence of decision.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No, because that would be the decision, not an absence of decision.

Sorry? Are you suggesting people would be more okay with that process (you know, under the conditions set in the post). Because I guarantee you every single Calgary fan would lose their mind.

[calgarybornnraised]

Has the Linesman come back yet, or is he still out too?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Ah what?

First the NHL had to rule on the case which would absolutely set precedent. This can not be debated, it's fact.

I would argue that if the NHLPA successful argues that Wideman was not liable for his actions because he was concussed to the arbitrator, that would absolutely set precedent.

The NHL's wheel of justice has demonstrated time and again that their precedents are irrelevant, and therefore don't even really exist. IIRC they never seem to reference past incidents in their explanation videos.

I always get the sense from your posts that you view this fairly black and white - Wideman intentionally hit Henderson, and that a concussion is the only thing that could conceivably explain his 'temporary insanity'. I don't think that is the argument, but rather the possible concussion explains his lack of 'situational awareness' and that everything that happened was reactionary.


What is interesting to consider is what the arbitrator is actually doing during this period. All we know there was an in-person meeting Thursday and Friday (correct me if wrong); did he review anything in advance? No doubt he has been reading transcripts and/or watching video of the previous proceedings, but is he reviewing documentation of other incidents that were likely brought forward too? I imagine at this point he has made his decision and is writing it. It will be interesting to see what exactly is released to the public.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I always get the sense from your posts that you view this fairly black and white - Wideman intentionally hit Henderson, and that a concussion is the only thing that could conceivably explain his 'temporary insanity'. I don't think that is the argument, but rather the possible concussion explains his lack of 'situational awareness' and that everything that happened was reactionary.

That's not my argument. That, admittedly only a portion, is the NHLPA's argument.

Let's look. Why is the NHLPA appealing to the neutral arbitrator?

Well, we know, they released a statement:

“We are extremely disappointed but not surprised that Gary Bettman upheld the decision of his staff to suspend Dennis Wideman for 20 games. This decision completely ignores the effects of the concussion that Dennis sustained when he was driven into the boards eight seconds before colliding with the linesman. We will appeal to the Neutral Discipline Arbitrator in order to have this decision overturned.”

This is about the only black and white portion of this mess. The NHLPA does not believe Wideman was responsible because of the concussion. What were the effects? Well Bettman's decision very clearly goes over them - although potentially biased.

There's certainly the physical aspects. Balance, wooziness, whatever. I think most of us would agree that still constitutes accidental. That's not really the contentious part about the NHLPA's argument.

It's the behavioural part.

During the hearing, Dr. Comper acknowledged that he was retained to try to
determine whether the player's judgment had been impaired. (Tr. 143) As noted above, Dr.
Comper's February 2 report states that "Mr. Wideman's usual capacity to exercise his judgment. . .
was significantly affected by the head trauma that he experienced" during the game. (Exh. 19)

This is very clearly showing that the NHLPA's expert was not just focused on Wideman 'accidentally' bumping into the linesman. No, indeed the expert (again, hired by the NHLPA) is arguing that Wideman's judgment was impaired. I suppose there's still room to argue what exactly 'judgment' meant in this case. Except Dr. Comper further explained what he meant:

Dr. Comper provided the NHLPA with a report on February 2, stating, among other things, that
Mr. Wideman's "striking of the official could both plausibly and probably be attributed to his confusional
state while he was in the immediate post-concussion phase. Indeed, behavioural changes — including
aggressive and even combative behaviours — are commonly reported behavioural hallmarks of head
trauma. " (Exh. 19) In addition, "it is my view that Mr. Wideman's usual capacity to exercise his
judgment and to control his impulses was significantly affected by the head trauma that he experienced
during the January 27, 2016 game for the period immediately after that incident. "

He's talking about aggessiveness and combative behavioural changes. Go through the decision, or maybe even a couple of my posts and there's ample evidence to suggest that one of the NHLPA's arguments was that Wideman was not "thinking straight" and therefore he did not "intentionally" hit the ref.

But extend that to every incident. If Darnell Nurse was hit in the Sharks-Oilers game, hell even the game before. "Oops, don't remember the incident with Polak, must have been concussed." Boom, no more suspension as long as he gets a doctor to say he was concussed and he will because anyone can be coached. Same thing with Landeskog. "Sorry I crossed check him in the head, I've been feeling woozy lately must have been concussed, appeal my suspension please."

You think that's exaggeration? The NHLPA experts argued that, if Wideman did indeed attack a ref, he did so because he was concussed and the NHLPA is saying he deserves no suspension because of that.

The NHLPA, and myself (if that matters), certainly didn't rule out Wideman just accidentally hitting the linesman. It's their other argument, essentially saying "and if it wasn't an accident, he's still not responsible because..." That makes this a big mess.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Sorry? Are you suggesting people would be more okay with that process (you know, under the conditions set in the post). Because I guarantee you every single Calgary fan would lose their mind.

Not all the people here that ridiculously claim he is the worst player in the league

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

He's talking about aggessiveness and combative behavioural changes. Go through the decision, or maybe even a couple of my posts and there's ample evidence to suggest that one of the NHLPA's arguments was that Wideman was not "thinking straight" and therefore he did not "intentionally" hit the ref.

But extend that to every incident. If Darnell Nurse was hit in the Sharks-Oilers game, hell even the game before. "Oops, don't remember the incident with Polak, must have been concussed." Boom, no more suspension as long as he gets a doctor to say he was concussed and he will because anyone can be coached. Same thing with Landeskog. "Sorry I crossed check him in the head, I've been feeling woozy lately must have been concussed, appeal my suspension please."

You think that's exaggeration? The NHLPA experts argued that, if Wideman did indeed attack a ref, he did so because he was concussed and the NHLPA is saying he deserves no suspension because of that.

The NHLPA, and myself (if that matters), certainly didn't rule out Wideman just accidentally hitting the linesman. It's their other argument, essentially saying "and if it wasn't an accident, he's still not responsible because..." That makes this a big mess.

If only we had a decision to go through. All we have is a video riddled with inaccuracies that only shows one camera angle (seven times), and 20 pages of mostly fluff where Bettman and co. cherry picked only a few tidbits (not necessarily even in context). This has lead us (you?) to believe that these elements were the crux of the argument, whereas I suspect PA's argument was more focused around the accidental nature of the incident.

Pretty big differences between this and the Nurse, Landeskog, or any other number of incidents. While it certainly doesn't look good, Wideman's actions were far less intense/aggressive/not 'maximal force', etc. It's fair to say Landeskog, Nurse, and any other number of incidents are full force. Nurse didn't throw one punch, it was at least 8 according to the video (though they seem to have a habit of messing up simple details), and Landeskog delivered a full speed full strength cross check. Reckless, violent and aggressive...I would characterize Wideman more as careless and more forceful than it should have been, but not really aggressive.

The other HUGE, HUGE difference is that the Wideman/Henderson collision happened 8 seconds after the possible concussion. Certainly, this whole situation has shown the mess of so-called concussion protocol, but it had absolutely no bearing on the incident. This other can of worms you are talking about should be 99% preventable through a concussion protocol with teeth.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Pretty big differences between this and the Nurse, Landeskog, or any other number of incidents. While it certainly doesn't look good, Wideman's actions were far less intense/aggressive/not 'maximal force', etc. It's fair to say Landeskog, Nurse, and any other number of incidents are full force. Nurse didn't throw one punch, it was at least 8 according to the video (though they seem to have a habit of messing up simple details), and Landeskog delivered a full speed full strength cross check. Reckless, violent and aggressive...I would characterize Wideman more as careless and more forceful than it should have been, but not really aggressive.

Full force has no barring on whether it was concussion 'induced' or not. In fact, as the experts testified, aggressiveness is a symptom of concussions.

The other HUGE, HUGE difference is that the Wideman/Henderson collision happened 8 seconds after the possible concussion. Certainly, this whole situation has shown the mess of so-called concussion protocol, but it had absolutely no bearing on the incident. This other can of worms you are talking about should be 99% preventable through a concussion protocol with teeth.

Concussions affect people differently. In Wideman's case it appears he only forgot the incident 4 days after. Unfortunately, concussions can have immediately effects or show up days later. You'll easily find concussion experts, even those not being paid by the NHLPA, testify that. So 8 seconds, 48 hours later, doesn't matter.

I do agree that we don't know the crux of the argument, instead we got what Bettman released. The NHLPA though was clear that they wanted the decision to be considered with the effects of concussions so we do know that it wasn't just tidbits.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Ah what?

First the NHL had to rule on the case which would absolutely set precedent. This can not be debated, it's fact. What they ruled, to a degree, was that Wideman was still liable for his actions regardless of the potential effects the concussion may have had on him (or maybe more aptly ruled that there was no evidence to prove that Wideman was affected by the potential behavioural effects of a concussion).

Of course that should take time. It's far from an easy decision. They are afterall, to a degree, arguing against concussion experts. Again, anyone who wants to answer that underlined question, be my guest.

This was before the arbitrator enters the equation and the argument doesn't change once it has. The NHL had to be careful whichever way they went with this decision because of ramifications from future incidents, the concussion lawsuit, the officials union and the NHLPA itself.

Now, whether or not the arbitrators decision would set precedent, the fact it has taken so long shows that the NHL was not unreasonable in their approach. At least not to a degree that people have been crying about. It's a very contentious argument that does have both medicine, evidence and logic backing both sides. It's far from an easy decision, this is no longer "oops, sorry I was looking down and didn't see him" that I feel a vast majority of posters still believe it is.

I would argue that if the NHLPA successful argues that Wideman was not liable for his actions because he was concussed to the arbitrator, that would absolutely set precedent. Why would the NHL think they could argue differently next time an incident like this comes up when the NHLPA will have the same experts to argue the exact same thing to a neutral arbitrator?

Again though, really besides the point. The NHL took so long because it would set precedent and would have major consequences if they ruled differently. The third party doesn't change that, it just gives the NHLPA one more option to argue their case.

Good summary and one more very important issue to add.

There is a class action lawsuit filed by former players against the NHL, and the NHL's handling of concussions is a key part of that.

I can only assume that any statements made by the NHL and parties in this Wideman hearing can potentially become evidence in that case.

This is a whole hell of a lot bigger than Wideman, and it dragging is certainly not embarrassing to the NHL.

The potential repercussions of any misstep can have major consequences.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Full force has no barring on whether it was concussion 'induced' or not. In fact, as the experts testified, aggressiveness is a symptom of concussions.

I agree, the level of force/aggressiveness doesn't really matter in terms of concussion. I think it matters in terms of punishment. Bertuzzi? pretty damn forceful. McSorley? Certainly not full-force, but obviously deliberate and specifically targetted. Simon? Full force.

Absolving Wideman would not offer carte-blanche for post-concussion craziness. It's not unreasonable to say that an awkward and ugly situation like Wideman's could be reasonably considered. Concussion or no concussion, I think it's reasonable to throw the book at things like aforementioned incidents, or Hunter on Turgeon, Hextall on Nilsson, Suter on Gretzky, etc. I just don't think this Wideman thing belongs in the same conversation as any of those.

Concussions affect people differently. In Wideman's case it appears he only forgot the incident 4 days after. Unfortunately, concussions can have immediately effects or show up days later. You'll easily find concussion experts, even those not being paid by the NHLPA, testify that. So 8 seconds, 48 hours later, doesn't matter.

Agreed, which is why a player who has taken a blow to the head should be examined. There is still a can of worms, but it should be a very short can (ie. 30 seconds or less) as once a player has made the bench after a possible concussion, the LEAGUE should be making sure concussed players don't end up back on the ice. As has been discussed, they absolutely need to protect the players and the teams from themselves, and are doing a pathetic job of it.

[OzSome]

This is a joke!! Wideman probably deserved the 20-games suspension but this process is a joke. It took a long time for the NHL to decide if Wideman gets suspended or not. When he were suspended, it took a long time for the NHL and Bettman to decide if they keep the 20 games suspension. Now it is taking a long time for the arbitrator to decide on the appeal. His suspension ends after this Friday so how come the process is still going on? I don't think I have ever seen anything like this in the NHL. When will this thing ends?

[djsFlames]

*applauds NHL*

####ing joke of a league in how it's run. At least give the process your due diligence, regardless of the outcome.

I don't even want Wideman back, but this was pathetic.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by OzSome

This is a joke!! Wideman probably deserved the 20-games suspension but this process is a joke. It took a long time for the NHL to decide if Wideman gets suspended or not. When he were suspended, it took a long time for the NHL and Bettman to decide if they keep the 20 games suspension. Now it is taking a long time for the arbitrator to decide on the appeal. His suspension ends after this Friday so how come the process is still going on? I don't think I have ever seen anything like this in the NHL. When will this thing ends?

Holy hell. Class action lawsuit from former NHLers, anything that happens here in the Wideman situation is potential testimony.

This is not rocket science, it is way the F bigger than Wideman

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calgarybornnraised

Has the Linesman come back yet, or is he still out too?

no and he won't...OA wouldn't allow it even if he is good to go

[Geeoff]

I hope this decision drags out into the off-season for maximum hilarity.

[gunnner]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Holy hell. Class action lawsuit from former NHLers, anything that happens here in the Wideman situation is potential testimony.

This is not rocket science, it is way the F bigger than Wideman

Exactly. Remove the far reaching concussion implications, and this thing is done with ages ago. We are through the looking glass here people.