Sojourn

Members
  • Content count

    2,386
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    47

Sojourn last won the day on January 10 2016

Sojourn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

492 Excellent

About Sojourn

  • Rank
    True Ducks Fan
  1. I don't think most would agree he can at least play until the age of Jagr, and certainly not well, because what Jagr is doing is extraordinary. You're basically suggesting Ovechkin should have no problem doing something that no one else can do. Admittedly, Ovechkin is the best goal scorer of his generation, but there is no guarantee he ages well, and he'd have to age unbelievably well for him to do what Jagr is.
  2. Yeah, I actually found that approach pretty questionable too. That seems pretty insane to me. Neither the NHLPA or Wideman were apparently willing to accept responsibility at all.
  3. http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/pdfs/NHL-Wideman-Order.PDF This is the decision from Bettman. It's actually a pretty interesting read, if anyone wants to see how the process went.
  4. He may just not be particularly intelligent. I mean that sincerely, and not as an attack on him. He just may not be the sharpest knife in the block.
  5. Sounds like Wideman's suspension stays at 20. Good. That was nonsense from him. Edit: Adding link - http://www.tsn.ca/bettman-upholds-wideman-s-20-game-suspension-1.439445 I have to say... Wideman's response to all of this is really inappropriate.
  6. So your argument is one of coincidence. The linesman just -happened- to get a concussion in the very same game that he was shoved from behind by Wideman? You really think that's going to convince anyone? This isn't a murder trial, so the NHL doesn't need to defend against reasonable doubt. If the arbiter feels that Wideman intended to hit him, the resulting injury could certainly be enough. Remember that this isn't similar to hitting a player. Hits can go wrong then, and just because an injury results doesn't necessarily mean intent to injure. This is on an individual that Wideman had no business hitting. Had no business even touching. If this were on a player, I'd say you're right, but it isn't. It's on an official. As for the concussion protocols, the Calgary Flames are the ones responsible for their own players. It's up to them to make sure that proper protocol is followed. In the case of an official, I actually have no idea what the protocol is, if there is a protocol at all. The player protocol is still fairly recently. The NHL may actually not have similar measures in place for the officials. It's stupid that this could actually be the case, but it wouldn't be the first time something so obvious was missed. I'm not going to defend the league if that is the case, but even if it is the case it's still a separate issue from the Wideman incident. Just like any punishment against the Calgary organization would be. The attorney can make as much of a stink as he wants, but how does that impact the decision? It may not make the NHL look clean, but it doesn't make what Wideman did any more appropriate. In Carcillo's incident, I don't think it's nearly as bad as Wideman's. Yes, Carcillo makes contact with the official. More than once. But the magnitude of it was far less. To me, this incident reinforces that Wideman deserves more than 10 games. I won't try to predict what the result of the appeal will be, but if they use this as a precedent, I think it favors the NHL. It's deliberate contact, but is there really any doubt that Carcillo could have injured the official if he had intended to? In Wideman's case, the best you can say he could have hurt the linesman worse. That's not really the best defense.
  7. As for the intent portion, it's hard to believe that Wideman didn't see him at all, considering he was directly in front of him. That's a pretty weak defense on his part. Added to it is that Wideman extended out with his arms, which was a completely unnecessary action on his part. This wasn't just a bump that ended badly. Wideman full on shoved the linesman from behind. I'm not sure intent is that hard to prove here. This wasn't an opposing player. It was an official. In hard to miss black and white stripes. Directly in front of Wideman's view. When there is so much going against Wideman here, I'm not so sure that the burden of proof is so heavily on the league. Just look at the video, and I think it's tough to find a defense for Wideman. At least one that doesn't come across as outrageous. Adding to all of this is that Wideman went to the bench and didn't seem to care at all about the linesman that was still laying on the ice. I don't know about anyone else, but if I just floor an official on accident, my first response isn't going to be to go to the bench without a care in the world. A concussion is Wideman's best, and likely only defense here, and unfortunately there is also a long history of concussions in the NHL, and none of them involve a player attacking an official in this manner. If the arbiter thinks the concussion is enough of a factor to drop it down to the less extreme rule, he could potentially get 10 games minimum, but 20 games is the minimum if they feel Wideman knew what he was doing.
  8. Concussion symptoms don't require a blow to the head. Whiplash has been linked to concussions.
  9. The team doctor probably isn't going to be seen as the most reliable source. The NHL is going to look at the facts, which could include consultation from their own doctors. Simply being concussed isn't necessarily a defense, assuming it's true at all. Consider that he showed no visible signs, and he finished the game without issue. It also doesn't help that he was back on the ice as recently as today. Based on the rule that the NHL is citing for his punishment, 20 games is the absolute minimum he can get. The appeal would need to prove that his actions were unintentional. Even with evidence of a concussion(which would need to be proven), that might be a tough sell. The league has precedence to support them. There are plenty of concussions to look at, and none of them involve a player responding like this. Maybe he'll get lucky, but unless there is important information we aren't privy to, he put a linesman in the hospital with a cross check/shove from behind.
  10. An official isn't eligible to be hit. Ever. You can only ever make contact with them when it's unavoidable in a normal game situation(this wasn't that). The NHL has to protect their officials, and Wideman's action is just hard to defend. Not only was the linesman in front of Wideman, but Wideman made no attempt to avoid contact, or to minimize the force of the impact. Wideman even made it worse by shoving pretty forcefully with his arms. Another mark against Wideman is there is no evidence he was concussed. Not during the incident, and not after. He went right to the bench, sat down, and showed no immediate concern at all for the official he shoved to the ice. The official spent the night in the hospital after that. I don't think the NHL's response to this was ever in doubt. 10 games is the minimum for a minor incident with an official. 20 is the minimum for intent to injure on an official. This is a by the book result.
  11. I think the flaw is that he's limited offensively at this level. He isn't creative. His shot isn't high end, by NHL standards. He's certainly fast, but his overall mobility outside of straight line speed isn't terrific. His passing skills are rather meh. Finally, I think he suffers from tunnel vision. He gets the puck on his stick and he wants to get it on net, even if it means leaving his linemates behind with his speed, or putting a bad angle shot on net. Etem is a player who, I think, would be much more successful if he reinvented himself like Cogliano. He was also expected to be an offensive contributor, and he even was for a bit, but it wasn't something he could sustain. When we acquired him, his role wasn't that of a top six scoring forward, like he was in Edmonton, but a utility defensive forward. And it's difficult to argue that he has been much more effective in that role. For us, at least. That's what I think Etem needs to do.
  12. I really don't think confidence will ever be a concern with Gibson, so I have no problem with him being on the ice while the team is struggling. He may even help contribute to getting out of the funk. The kid deserves to play, so play him. Maybe his stats won't be as pretty, but is that really the point? The goal is to win games. I have more faith, right now, that Gibson can do that than I do Andersen. The one concern I have regarding Gibson is his health. We need him to be able to stay healthy. At least enough to be a legitimate starter.