.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
Dennis Wideman's successful suspension appeal thwarted by NHL's flawed process
Calgary Flames defenseman Dennis Wideman technically won his appeal of his 20-game suspension for hitting a referee, but the result is more of a theoretical win than a real victory. Independent arbitrator James Oldham cut Wideman's suspension to 10 games Friday after ruling that while Wideman did injure a referee, there is not sufficient proof that Wideman did so intentionally.
Arbitrator James Oldham rules there isn't evidence to support idea Wideman intended to injure linesman Henderson. pic.twitter.com/UtrzRdqTKO
— Chris Johnston (@reporterchris) March 11, 2016
But because Wideman was not permitted to play during the lengthy appeals process, the defenseman already has missed 19 games. He will get back $282,258 of the $564,516 he was going to forfeit as a result of the suspension and he was eligible to play as early as Friday night at home against Arizona. But the time missed is not replaceable. In this situation, the only player who suffers because of the extra games served is Wideman, as his Calgary Flames are not a playoff contender. But this could have been a different story if the penalized player was an important part of a team fighting for a playoff spot.
If, for example, the Pittsburgh Penguins were in a battle for a playoff spot and star forward Sidney Crosby had to sit out while appealing a suspension, Crosby's absence could put the Penguins at a significant disadvantage. Would it be better for a player in that scenario not to appeal his suspension in case his appeal kept him out longer than necessary? Or is it worth appealing in case a player misses only an extra nine games instead of an extra 10 games?
The NHL could try to speed up the appeals process — Wideman's hit happened on Jan. 27 and the appeal ruling came down on March 11, a period of 44 days. That time frame is way too long, especially if the player in question plays for a team in the middle of a playoff race. There is also the option of allowing a player to continue to play while he appeals a league ruling. That's the way the system works in baseball and it's hard to argue against the merits of that route.
The Wideman appeal also raises the question of whether the league should adopt some form of medical amnesty. Immediately before hitting the referee, Wideman suffered a hard hit from Nashville Predators forward Miikka Salomaki and appeared to be woozy on video. But Wideman did not leave the bench after the play to undergo the league's concussion protocol, and the league originally denied a concussion played a role in the play. Still, Wideman ultimately was diagnosed with a concussion from the play, and Oldham's ruling cited Wideman's concussed state as a reason why Wideman's hit on the referee might not have been intentional.
So the arbitrator essentially concludes that due to the concussion, Wideman couldn't know he might hurt the linesman pic.twitter.com/1jbqx66jjL
— Bruce Arthur (@bruce_arthur) March 11, 2016
Despite a text message Wideman sent to another player saying he was only having a hearing because of "stupid refs and stupid media," Oldham wrote that it didn't represent intent to injure. Oldham wrote that Wideman's "exemplary" record without discipline throughout his career also played into his decision.
The league has plenty of motivation to refuse to chalk the incident up to a concussion. If Wideman was so concussed that he did not realize he was hitting a ref but the team didn't immediately subject Wideman to the concussion protocol, the league's concussion regulations look really bad. The Calgary Flames would appear negligent in that scenario. So it would be best for the league and the team to deny a concussion played a role even if one occurred.
Perhaps the NHL's appeal process could be reworked in a way in which a team could admit it made a mistake in failing to diagnose a concussion with some sort of amnesty for the first case of a missed concussion. If the team continued to fail to diagnose concussions, then there could be some sort of tiered penalty system to hold teams accountable without hurting a player's chances of appealing an unwarranted suspension.
In Wideman's case, the NHL is not going down without a fight. The league was not happy Wideman's suspension was reduced and issued a statement shortly after the announcement about Wideman's lesser penalty.
NHL statement on Wideman suspension. pic.twitter.com/gGOJ9pWFIz
— NHL Public Relations (@PR_NHL) March 11, 2016
It looks as if the battle over Wideman's suspension still is not over. And if the NHL and NHLPA want a more effective appeals process, it seems like there is a lot of work left to do there too.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
