Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wideman's Hit From Behind on Linesman

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    10 games on merit, and another 10 to pacify the officials' union.

    Now, the other union will take its turn at bat.

    “We strongly disagree with the League’s decision to suspendDennis Wideman,” the Players’ Association said in a statement. “Dennis has played in 11 NHL seasons and almost 800 games without incident. The facts, including the medical evidence presented at the hearing, clearly demonstrate that Dennis had no intention to make contact with the linesman. An appeal has been filed on the player’s behalf.”
    What would Fred do?

    Comment


    • #32
      10 games on merit, and another 10 to pacify the officials' union.

      Now, the other union will take its turn at bat.

      "We strongly disagree with the League's decision to suspend Dennis Wideman," the Players' Association said in a statement. "Dennis has played in 11 seasons and almost 800 games without incident. The facts, including the medical evidence presented at the hearing, clearly demonstrate that Dennis had no intention to make contact with the linesman. An appeal has been filed on the player's behalf."

      What would Fred do?

      Comment


      • #33
        So Wideman being a 'good guy' excuses his action? Wideman not hurting the linesman more severely excuses his action? Wideman potentially being concussed excuses his action?

        So can we get a list of one time offenses good guys can get away? I mean I am cool with injuring a linesamn..could come in handy in a playoff situation..but like can a 'good guy' get a way with a McSorely or a Bertuzzi..I mean just once...cause ya know..never been in trouble before...

        So long as said Beruzzi or McSorely doenst result in lasting damage...the inflicting player gets another go, right? No harm no foul?

        Lastly...if concussions damge a player's ability that severely..shouldnt the NHLPA be demanding players sit out lengthy stretchs of games at even the slightest suggestion of concussion? I am being serious...if a player is that much less repsonsible for his actions..for his safety..the safety of those around hm both in the sport and at home...he should probably be confined to a medical environment for a solid 10 days...before any decisons are even approached...

        Comment


        • #34
          The way the rule is worded, this is all about "intent."

          Wideman's good history (no suspensions and no fines in 755 NHL games) doesn't excuse a bad act, but is relevant when trying to determine his intent.

          By giving the official's union what it wanted, the League had to tag Wideman with intent to injure under Rule 40.2. But there was no call on the ice and the video is open to other interpretations.

          Also, the concussion angle will get a lot of scrutiny on appeal and beyond.

          The League's decision accepts that Wideman was later diagnosed as having suffered a concussion from the Salomaki check. But then they add this little jewel: "By his own admission, Wideman repeatedly refused immediate medical attention and remained in the game." This is exactly why the NHL and the NFL will end up paying billions down the road to settle concussion claims of retired players. Proper concussion protocols don't rely on a player to determine if he needs medical attention because players nearly always try to play through injuries like this. The League's concussion protocol was supposed to take the decision out of the hands of the players, but in this case they've reversed themselves in their attempt to justify the 20 game suspension.

          This decision was made by Colin Campbell, so it's not a surprise that it's screwed up. Now Bettman will have to weigh in, but Campbell has put him in a box.

          If Bettman upholds Campbell's decision, count on this being appealed by the NHLPA to an independent arbitrator.


          Last edited by Foggy; 02-04-2016, 11:16 AM.
          What would Fred do?

          Comment


          • #35
            Wideman didn't miss a shift, so they can shove the concussion argument up their ***. Furthermore, I'll echo what Rev said and mention that the 11 seasons with no incident bullshit is completely irrelevant. Some people go 40 or 50 years without murdering anyone and then they snap. What does that mean? You get a free pass on the first one? The guy ****ed up. Just because he regrets it now or was a nice guy yesterday doesn't matter. .Own up to it and stop trying to weasel your way out.

            Comment


            • #36
              I don;t believe you can use previous behavior as a benchmark for intent. If that were true no one would ever get suspended if we held the standard. Wideman;s intent was to hit the linesman..and he succeeded

              I also don;t believe the concussion hype. If you let Wideman off the concussion..do you then also wipe out any scoring plays he may have impacted or is it just a get out of jail free card? Do we go back and rewrite the end result of the game as if Wideman came out of the game?

              I have been concussed, plenty of Flyers have been concussed, the fact that Wideman stayed in the game doesn;t put more responsibility on the NHL...it puts it on Wideman and on the Flames (who disagreed with the decision). If a player later deemed concussed takes a two hand chop at another player..is it ok so long as he;s a 'good guy'

              The NHLPA is setting itself a trap...if they want to make the concussion an issue...because ultimately players are responsible for themselves...and if they are opting out of that responsibility it will fall on the NHL to set very strict protective guidelines...something tells me the Flames won;t like Johnny Gaudreau getting yanked from games every time he takes a big hit to be evaluated by a neutral party for concussion symptoms.

              "Oh you lost the game because Gaudrea was in back for 40 minutes of play time getting evaluated after 3 different hits? Sucks but we have to make sure the players are safe..."

              That is essentially what the NHLPA and Flames will be arguing for...since Wideman and the Flames apparently failed at such a high level to recognize his injured state.

              Concussions should be more serious than a get out of jail free card...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Kerry View Post
                Wideman didn't miss a shift, so they can shove the concussion argument up their ***. Furthermore, I'll echo what Rev said and mention that the 11 seasons with no incident bullshit is completely irrelevant. Some people go 40 or 50 years without murdering anyone and then they snap. What does that mean? You get a free pass on the first one? The guy ****ed up. Just because he regrets it now or was a nice guy yesterday doesn't matter. .Own up to it and stop trying to weasel your way out.

                Yup..the "He was such a quiet man, Good Neighbor. We're totally shocked" bit never seems to work for the average joe...

                Comment


                • #38
                  Jeez, if I'm ever in trouble with the law, I hope you guys aren't on my jury. ;-)

                  Here's an additional take on the Wideman situation from another bleeding heart, Damien Cox.

                  Trying to make sense of Dennis Wideman’s harsh 20-game suspension

                  http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/trying-to-make-sense-of-dennis-widemans-harsh-20-game-suspension/


                  What would Fred do?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Foggy View Post
                    Jeez, if I'm ever in trouble with the law, I hope you guys aren't on my jury. ;-)

                    Here's an additional take on the Wideman situation from another bleeding heart, Damien Cox.

                    Trying to make sense of Dennis Wideman’s harsh 20-game suspension

                    http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/trying-to-make-sense-of-dennis-widemans-harsh-20-game-suspension/


                    The Weber hit used as a comparable incident in that article is total apples to oranges. The guy is chasing the puck, looks over his left shoulder to see if anyone is behind him, and in less than two strides is on top of the ref while he was trying to locate the puck again. He clearly braces himself for impact, but falls over trying to minimize the damage. A supposedly woozy Wideman steamrolled the same official with barely even a stutter in his balance. I just don't understand the case people are trying to make.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by dsl135 View Post


                      That's kind of an odd take, in my opinion.

                      So they don't have history... so he hasn't been suspended before... Does that mean he can't lose his cool for a minute and do something that is suspendable?

                      I mean, it's just kind of weird. There's only so much benefit of the doubt that can be given, but when you start giving so much as to say "well he hasn't been suspended before" then that's really one of the major issues people have with the NHL. If a guy doesn't have a history of suspensions he doesn't get suspended, but how can you get a history if they never suspend you because you don't have history?

                      I'll agree the other angle would be extremely helpful, and I'm curious to see if he was blinking or looking elsewhere, but I've seen enough with the one angle to know he was not dazed like people want to say. He doesn't waver at all while skating. He's completely in control and he hits the linesman with intent. You can tell by the way he doesn't try to catch the linesman in a sort of hug, which is what people do in accidental contact... but instead he forcefully crosschecks through the linesman. That's intent.

                      Here's my opinion.... He got drilled in the corner, cracked his head on the boards and he was hurting bad. When I was growing up I was taught you don't lay on the ice when you get hurt. You get up and get off the ice unless you CAN'T get off the ice. Thankfully there are still some players left that have those same values. I don`t know enough about Wideman to know if he's one of those guys or not, but what I'm telling you is on that play, he looked like one of those guys to me. To me, all he's thinking is "the door is right there, just gotta get to that door" and at the last second, someone comes between him and that door. And they collided. Players and officials collide all the time. There's no suspensions. Occasionally officials even take an errant punch or high stick. Again, I don't recall suspensions for that. The take that he cross-checked him is just stupid to me. It's a natural reflex to bring your hands up when someone cuts in your path at the last moment like that. The take that he "follows through" is even stupider. It's basic physics. His arms (and stick) continue in the same direction they were travelling when they were met with the resistance in the first place. When the resistance is removed (Henderson fell down) what other direction would they go. His feet change direction slightly but clearly there wasn't time to avoid a collision. He continues to the bench as if nothing happened... because he's hurting and all he wants to do is get to the bench. People seem skeptical of him having a concussion but there is absolutely no question he got his bell rung. In the the video of him on the bench he looks completely out of it.

                      It was a collision. Only one person knows if it was intentional or not. He says it wasn't... what reason do I have not to believe him? Plenty of reasons to believe him though.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X