Man, that's real similar to Neill's hit on Drury.

This is the logic that Philly fans are using, but it's just rehashed jargon. "Looking the other way" and "admiring a pass"...it's just plain BS. Booth had just turned his head to the right when he got hit, a full half second to full second after passing. This is not looking the other way, in fact some Philly fans are trying to say it was ok because he had turned forward.

As far as "admiring a pass"...nobody in this league stands with his hand to chin, with a grin on his face watching a pass...nobody. Booth merely dropped a pass and took as much time (.3 seconds maybe) to turn his head back as any player under any circumstance on the ice. This is human nature, and unless a player is purposefully trying a "no look" pass, they will take a tiny moment to see if the pass was on target in order to see where they should skate to next.

I'm more than tired of hearing this type of language, with the above types of recycled slogans, in order to justify injuring players. It's just plain BS. The NHL and players need to decide if they really want to keep playing russian roullette with themselves, because these incidents are becoming way too common. If it's not accounted for by respect from the players themselves, then the it needs to be accounted for by the rules. If the rules do not account for these hits, then the rules need to be changed.

FWIW, Scott Stevens is one of my all time favorite players. I don't ever remember him drilling a head shot from the side or behind. I just got done scouring youtube just to make sure, but every hit I saw and remember was from straight ahead against players that had their head turned away or literally straight down at their skates. And he only hit their head if they were bent down over the puck, because he never jumped up. I'm sure there were some close calls but he was not a dirty player. If he was playing today and he made a dirty hit then he should be suspended like anyone else.

It wasn't a cheap shot, just a freakish hit that caused a very scary injury. The NHL was correct in not issuing a suspension.

Absolutely not. Campbell went for the kill shot and made a direct hit on Umberger's jaw with his shoulder. Home bias causes people to see what they want to see.

EDIT: By the way, I don't think Campbell's hit was dirty, either. Borderline? Maybe, and clearly a shot to KO an unsuspecting opponent, but not dirty. Same with Richards, IMO.

I think in my first post I made the distinction between hits from the side or behind and ones from straight ahead. Campbell came straight on, Richards from the side. Campbell hit him in the chest, Richards hit the head.

There have been and will be times when a player tries to hit neck down but the player lowers his head or the follow through makes contact with the head. Why not just make it simple (and safer) and just call any hit from the side, rear, and chest up an assumed intent to injure? Why make the refs have to split hairs with a split second glimpse over whether it was a shoulder hit or a head shot? Just make players have to hit from straight ahead, chest down, or from the side chest down.

I don't want to hear whiners talk about how that's a wimpy way to play. I lowered my shoulder into player's ribs for hits on the ice, blocking and tackling on the football field, and into catchers while scoring on plays at the plate. If you actually care enough about scacrificing YOUR OWN BODY enough to make the play, you'll do it and take a guy out without risking his season or career. Hits to the gut or ribs will hurt like hell, make him puke, take his breath away, or crack/break a bone, but it won't end his career. If I hear someone talk about that being wimpy, I think they really mean that they aren't tough enough to bend down, drive with their legs and take a shoulder impact in order to take a guy out the hard and honest way.

Besides, what's the real point of a head shot? Even if you just get a piece of the mid section you're still going to get him off the puck. If you make a great hit and get a turnover for a scoring chance guess what? The whistle blows because of the injury anyway. Players and the NHL need to re-think this stuff because it's not worth a regular dose of season ending injuries or worse, and it's going full bore in that direction.

No need for violence, just tell her she's got a game misconduct and show her the door.

As I said in the GDT, the call on Rivet was horseshit. The Bruins player was holding onto Rivet's stick like it was the last fucking raft on the Titanic.

It wasn't a cheap shot, just a freakish hit that caused a very scary injury. The NHL was correct in not issuing a suspension.

There is no way anyone can justify this hit as OK. He hit him in the head. That is all you need to know.

No need for violence, just tell her she's got a game misconduct and show her the door.

As I said in the GDT, the call on Rivet was horseshit. The Bruins player was holding onto Rivet's stick like it was the last fucking raft on the Titanic.

Players are taught on ice awareness from DAY ONE of Peewees when you start to hit. Always have your head up, know where your opponents are.

Booth passed one way and skated in another, and chose to look behind him instead of who was near him.

It's unfortunate that these injuries happen, but the only way to stop these hits to the head all together is to banish open ice hits. And that is NOT going to happen.

I've hit players in the head with my shoulder before, and not been assessed a single penalty.

I've been hit in the head before, and missed a month of my season with a mild concussion... but it was my own fucking fault, because I was looking down at the blade of my stick.

Did you ever play hockey?

It sucks, but it's part of the game.