Can you cite these suspensions? There are a ton of clips of refs getting clobbered by players and getting nothing because it was deemed an accident. Can't think of any that were suspended.
This was what I was bracing for - debatable yes, but there is not a clear cut defence that it was unintentional, and the NHL is also thinking about the precedent implications this decision will have. They are clearly sending a message that any abuse of officials, even if such abuse is in a somewhat grey area, will not be tolerated.
What is the precedent? Accidental (gray area), but violent contact means potentially a 20 game suspension?
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
This is a garbage suspension. A few games would've been fine, but this is a knee jerk reaction to social media crying by people who don't look at the entire context of what happened. This was not a malicious deliberate attack on an official.
The NHL is incompetent.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
Jumps into the linesman before contact, follows through with both arms, and like Wideman shows no concern afterward for the linesman's health. 0 games.
No doubt Wideman's is worse, but how is that a 20-game difference in punishment.
Sportsnet Stats @SNstats
#Flames Dennis Wideman's 20-game suspension is tied for the 2nd longest ban in NHL history for abusing an official.
I think that people who are outraged by this decision do need to set it into context: In accordance with NHL rules, a player can receive 10 games for grabbing an official's shirt, or putting his hand on his shoulder just to stop him and get his attention. Mike Peca was suspended (albeit for just five games) for doing nothing more than grabbing Greg Kimberley's arm.
The League is clearly of the opinion that Wideman's actions constitute an intent to injure, and based on the video evidence this is a reasonable conclusion to reach. Within the context of how seriously the League treats deliberate contact with officials, the penalty does not seem so severe in my view.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
NHL likely went with twenty to appease the referees Union and then let it go to independent arbitration so if it goes get reduced the NHL can wipe they're hands and tell the refs that they were with them.
That's what I figure.
NHL wasn't in a good spot here. Better for them to go high and let it get struck down on appeal then to go low and maybe get crucified in the press and alienate the officials.
Even steinburg was just mentioning on the radio that Carcillo got 6 for making deliberate contact with an official a couple years back (although not as vicious contact as widens appeared) which means a 20 game for this shows the league thinks sideman was intentionally trying to hurt the official
Most of those did not occur during play and/or were clearly intentional.
As previously mentioned there are about a dozen incidents that more closely resemble the Wideman incident in recent history.
Even if the league couldn't tell if it was on purpose and wanted to suspend him for the optics of it all, they gave him way more than any of the other recent suspensions for abuse, all of which were clearly intentional.
Jumps into the linesman before contact, follows through with both arms, and like Wideman shows no concern afterward for the linesman's health. 0 games.
No doubt Wideman's is worse, but how is that a 20-game difference in punishment.
There's a huge difference.. Wideman skated up the ice with nothing blocking his view and smoked a linesman - whether he meant to or not he did... Good on him to apologize but he still did it... It's like saying sorry officer I know I smoked that guy on standing on the corner but I said sorry and didn't really see him - can I go now...
The Following User Says Thank You to BOSSY For This Useful Post:
This is a garbage suspension. A few games would've been fine, but this is a knee jerk reaction to social media crying by people who don't look at the entire context of what happened. This was not a malicious deliberate attack on an official.
The NHL is incompetent.
It is amazing how this statement comes purely because this is a Calgary Flame hockey player. I guarantee if Wideman had been a Canuck instead of a Flame, most of the posts like the one I quoted would be commending the NHL on a job well done. You can say different but it is rather obvious.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
So, this is cynical, but my immediate thought is that the league is fine with an appeal. They've sent their signal to their officials, which is, "we are on your side, we will protect you, we will come down hard on anything resembling abuse of official". Then they'll get an appeal that reduces the suspension to a more reasonable number.
EDIT: Okay, seems like other people had the same thought.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
He was right beside the bench door.
A good person would have helped Henderson up to his feet and then went to the bench. It would have taken 2 seconds and would not have embarrassed himself. I would have a better impression of the situation.
What is the precedent? Accidental (gray area), but violent contact means potentially a 20 game suspension?
I believe the precedent being set is you're always responsible for your actions, whether deliberate or not. He smoked an unsuspecting official and should have had ample time to move/react. 20 games is harsh, as it seemed reckless but not deliberate. I would have given 10 games.
He never lost his wits at all, he took a stinger to the shoulder and neck, he originally said as much. I am sure he meant the apology and I am sure there was no premeditation in the act but everything seems to indicate he lost control and he crosschecked the linesman, I have zero doubt at this point that is what happened. He never should have went into that hearing and changed his story to being woozy after all because he absolutely destroyed any credibility he had for his original argument, that it was incidental contact and that was all.
I think if he sticks with his original story he gets 10, I think because the NHL caught him in a lie to try and get them to go easy on him they threw the book at him and rightfully so.
How do you know he said he was 'woozy' in the hearing? People have been making grand leaps in logic that every time you take a hit that unsettles you it = concussion which = woozy. There is a lot more grey there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigwd
He was right beside the bench door.
A good person would have helped Henderson up to his feet and then went to the bench. It would have taken 2 seconds and would not have embarrassed himself. I would have a better impression of the situation.
No hockey player has or would ever do that...Also, in the off chance Henderson was actually really hurt, yanking him up off the ice is the last thing he should do.
He was right beside the bench door.
A good person would have helped Henderson up to his feet and then went to the bench. It would have taken 2 seconds and would not have embarrassed himself. I would have a better impression of the situation.
I don't agree with this, he didn't look right on the bench. He most likely didn't even realize he smoked Henderson. I know this gets a lot of heat but he had to get off the ice to not risk a too-many men on the ice penalty. Brodie already hopped off and was involved in the play.
The Following User Says Thank You to Otto-matic For This Useful Post: