horrible call.  How do u get 5mins and a game ejection for “interference”  Horrible officiating.

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 08:07 PM ET

Deserves a suspension, just ask the Rangers.

Posted by Red_Hugh from Ann Arbor on 05/01/09 at 08:12 PM ET

clean hit 1:42 and 1:50 of clip shows you that Hudler walked into brown’s shoulder. it’s kinda sad that brown is going to be suspended for a clean hit and rewarding Hudler’s stupidity for not keeping his head up and not been aware the brown was near him.

Posted by FlyersFan on 05/01/09 at 08:26 PM ET

Can’t wait for the “keep your head up” trolls.

Posted by pdxwing on 05/01/09 at 08:30 PM ET

Agreed.  Clean hit.

Posted by sinbin from Maine on 05/01/09 at 08:32 PM ET

I’m not a follower of either team, so I don’t have a horse in the race. In my opinion, it was a bogus call.  Hudler was skating into his own end and passed the puck up ice towards the Ducks end, goes into his turn and in so doing lowers his center of gravity - and his head.  Brown sees him coming and already has him lined up when Hudler drops down.  Brown doesn’t come in with his elbow up, and it looks like Hudler’s head runs into Brown’s shoulder.  Hudler just wasn’t aware of what was going on around him on the ice and he paid for it. It was a hard open ice check, and the call was bogus. Always regrettable to see someone injured, but I would suspect that in at least half of the cases, if not more, the majority of the damage is done when the player’s head hits the ice rather than from the initial hit itself, particularly given how loosely many of these players seem to wear their helmets, including the chinstraps.

Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 05/01/09 at 08:35 PM ET

Clean.  Can see why ref’s over reacted but Hudler left himself wide open.

Posted by McFly on 05/01/09 at 08:37 PM ET

I agree Hudler left himself in an awful position, but that doesn’t excuse Brown for using his forearm to decapitate him.

Posted by Kstewy16 on 05/01/09 at 08:41 PM ET

is goalie interference legal now?
take the Franzen goal away if Brown is getting a 5 minute penalty there.

are the Wings going to be on Saturday with Crosby and Ovechkin with Bettman kissing all of their bare asses? or will Crosby be punching the guys he doesnt like in the balls without getting a suspension, let alone a penalty.

this league is on par with the NBA

Posted by Death Metal Nightmare from MKE on 05/01/09 at 08:41 PM ET

Here comes the f*cking crybabies.

Posted by SYF from a "Bron-Y-Aur Stomp" on 05/01/09 at 08:42 PM ET

this is so stupid.  The way the NHL is nowadays you can’t hit at all without getting a suspension or ejected from the game.  It was the same thing with the stuart and umberger hit.  Hudler left himself open.  If you think this hit is dirty, then you better think the stuart hit is dirty as well.

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 08:44 PM ET

Clean hit… maybe a little late… maybe.  5 minutes for interference?  That’s a new one, wtf?  Idiotic call imo.  Agree with above poster about one of the Wings goals, how is that okay and this is not?

Posted by WingMan from Canada on 05/01/09 at 08:47 PM ET

It was late and straight to the head. There’s no place in hockey for that.

Posted by Red_Hugh from Ann Arbor on 05/01/09 at 08:49 PM ET

Its ok cause they are a wings fan.  Apparently, a clean hit becomes dirty if a player gets hurt.  Apparently, it is more likely to become dirty if it happens to the fan of that team.  For example, to wings fans, it’s the dirtiest hit ever.  To the rest of the NHL’s fans, it is the most retarted call ever.  Homerism at its finest.  If wing’s fans can say that the Stuart hit was perfectly clean, they have to agree with this hit too.  Bunch of hypocrites

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 08:53 PM ET

How many of you idiots calling it a clean hit are the same ones calling for Brashear to get life for his hit?  The hits are IDENTICAL, including int he timing of how late they were and in the follow-through.  If you want to give Brashear 6 for his, you’re looking at least at 3 or 4 for Brown.

Posted by Primis on 05/01/09 at 08:58 PM ET

It’s clearly not an elbow, but a shoulder to the head. As Brashear was judged to have done the same thing, I expect a suspension. However, in this case, there does not appear to have been a serious injury, which the league weights so heavily, it may well be much shorter than the 5 games Brash got. They will also take into account that he was thrown out of this game.

Posted by false_cause from DC on 05/01/09 at 09:01 PM ET

how many of you idiots are calling it a dirty hit cause he got hurt?  First of all, they call it interference cause it was a late hit, but the fact is, it wasn’t late at all.  Hudler let go of the puck probably less than a second before the hit.  That was nothing like the case with Brasher where the puck was nowhere near buddy.  Second of all, if you want to draw comparisons, the hit on rypien by eager last night in the hawks game was IDENTICAL TO THIS HIT.  The difference is, that hudler got hurt for being a moron and admiring his pass instead of being aware of his surroundings.  3rd of all, brashear got 5 for his hit, the additional game was for a prior incident.  What a homer!

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 09:04 PM ET

Like I said, just because Hudler put himself in a bad position doesn’t excuse Brown from making a dirty hit. He could have kept his arms down and made a huge but clean hit, but he didn’t, he chose to bring his arms up and hit Hudler in the head with his forearms, and that should be suspendable.

And Luongo is my hero, aren’t you just as much of a homer for calling it clean just because it happened to the Wings?

Posted by Kstewy16 on 05/01/09 at 09:04 PM ET

clean hit 1:42 and 1:50 of clip shows you that Hudler walked into brown’s shoulder.

It would take a fool like you, FF, to actually think Happy could “walk” into someone’s shoulder and end up cut like he was. But, remarkably, and perhaps for the first time ever, your comment wasn’t the dumbest one posted. Read the rule book, crybabies, you can’t hit a guy when he doesn’t have the puck. And you definitely can’t hit him in the head. Period. End of story…at least it is for Brown because the Duckies won’t make it past the end of his suspension.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 05/01/09 at 09:05 PM ET

If you think this hit is dirty, then you better think the stuart hit is dirty as well.

Luongo-is-my-hero I think you need to watch the Stuart hit with your eyes open.

Posted by Red_Hugh from Ann Arbor on 05/01/09 at 09:10 PM ET

I’m not a follower of either team, so I don’t have a horse in the race. In my opinion, it was a bogus call.  Hudler was skating into his own end and passed the puck up ice towards the Ducks end, goes into his turn and in so doing lowers his center of gravity - and his head.  Brown sees him coming and already has him lined up when Hudler drops down.  Brown doesn’t come in with his elbow up, and it looks like Hudler’s head runs into Brown’s shoulder.  Hudler just wasn’t aware of what was going on around him on the ice and he paid for it. It was a hard open ice check, and the call was bogus. Always regrettable to see someone injured, but I would suspect that in at least half of the cases, if not more, the majority of the damage is done when the player’s head hits the ice rather than from the initial hit itself, particularly given how loosely many of these players seem to wear their helmets, including the chinstraps.

So what you are saying is that it’s Hudlers fault for hitting Browns shoulder with his head?!?!?! I don’t care if it was clean, a hit to the head is a hit to the head. Not to mention that it was clearly late, and if you don’t think that then you are an idiot. Don’t give me this BS that Hudler wasn’t aware what was happening, of course he wasn’t aware, last time I checked you shouldn’t have to be aware that someone if going to take your head off behind the play. And it’s also funny how you say you don’t follow either team but are from PIT…hmmmm, who did the WIngs beat last year for the Stanley Cup?

Posted by YYZerman from Detroit, Michigan on 05/01/09 at 09:11 PM ET

how does that make me a homer.  You make it sound like I have something against the wings.  First of all, I am not a Ducks fan, Im a canucks fan.  Second of all, I think the hit is clean, the only reason it hit buddys head was cuase he had his head down.  Third of all, I said if you consider this hit dirty, then you have to consider the Stuart hit on Umberger dirty as well, which in my opinion was a clean hit as well.  So genius, how does that make me a homer?

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 09:14 PM ET

What planet are you on to think he led with his arms / elbow??  Only issue is it was late.  Clean hit otherwise.  Hudler admired his pass and left himself wide open.  Again, maybe slightly late but suspension would be a joke.

As was mentioned - 5 minutes for interference????  Come on….

Posted by McFly on 05/01/09 at 09:14 PM ET

OlderThanChelios - True, you can’t hit the guy without the puck, but the rule has always been called with a 1 or 2 second grace period once the player releases the puck.  Hudler was looking over his shoulder, made the pass, started to turn, and got leveled, all within a couple seconds.  As others have said, look at Stuart’s hit on Umberger - Umberger touches the puck and loses it, and it’s 10+ feet away as Stuart delivers a shoulder to his head. Stuart’s shoulder hit Umberger’s head in part because Umberger had his head down in pursuit of the puck.  And Umberger’s injury was far more severe, given that the guy could barely hold himself upright immediately afterwards (how the Columbus staff let him back into the game after getting his bell-rung like that is beyond me).  So if Stuart’s shoulder to the head is legal (and I think it was) then so is Browns.

Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 05/01/09 at 09:14 PM ET

Red Hugh, This is pretty ironic since my name is Hugh too.  Anyways, FYI I did see the Stuart hit, with my Eyes open, and if you read my posts, you will see that I said it was a clean hit as well.  ALL I SAID, was that if you think this hit is DIRTY, then you better believe that the Stuart hit was dirty as well.  Hence I think both hits are clean. I also think the hit on Rypien was fine as well.

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 09:18 PM ET

YYzerman - Yeah buddy, because everybody who lives in Pittsburgh is a Pens fan, right? Not me - I’m from Buffalo originally, and follow the Sabres, just came to Pittsburgh for work, so I don’t personally give a da*n about the Cup series from last year. And yeah, it is partly Hudler’s fault that his head ran into Brown’s shoulder, because he had his turned around facing the other direction and down as he’s making his turn. And how was it behind the play? Hudler WAS the play 1 second before Brown hit him. The consensus on this board is clearly in favor of a clean hit, aside from the Wings’ fans.

Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 05/01/09 at 09:19 PM ET

Also btw, at least 90 percent of the people who are calling this a clean hit here are NOT DUCKS FANS OR WINGS FANS.  It is a unbiased belief.  If you think its dirty, go look at the posts of 90 percent of the people commenting on this on TSN.  I swear, homers.

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 09:20 PM ET

Clean hit my ass.  Look, it clearly was late, it was clearly a hit to the head, which is a “point of emphasis” by the league and in all of hockey including the youth levels.  There is no argument.  To lay blame at the feet of Hudler is lame.  Deal with the facts.

Posted by Cornholio from USA on 05/01/09 at 09:24 PM ET

How is it late? Look at the video, which has a time counter on it. Hudler releases the puck at 1:07, and Brown hits him at 1:07 - at most it’s a second, certainly not two. How can that possibly be late?

Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 05/01/09 at 09:27 PM ET

the puck barely left his stick before he got hit.  Most fans agree that a hit a second or 2 after a player plays a puck is perfectly fine.  the fact that he had his head down was the only reason it was a head hit.  Buddy didnt bring up his arms.  You need to look at the facts before you cry cornholio.  My guess is you thought the Stuart hit was clean as well, which it was, yet your homerism thinks this hit is dirty.

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 09:31 PM ET

The hit by Brashear was also borderline late, after a player had passed the puck, to the head, and with a shoulder/elbow/upper arm.

If Brashear was suspended, then Brown should be suspended as a matter of consistency now that the precedent has been set.

Of course, expecting consistency from the NHL is like expecting a puppy not to chew on your most expensive leather shoes - not bloody likely, and a tremendous surprise if it does happen.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/01/09 at 09:33 PM ET

It would take a fool like you, FF, to actually think Happy could “walk” into someone’s shoulder and end up cut like he was. But, remarkably, and perhaps for the first time ever, your comment wasn’t the dumbest one posted. Read the rule book, crybabies, you can’t hit a guy when he doesn’t have the puck. And you definitely can’t hit him in the head. Period. End of story…at least it is for Brown because the Duckies won’t make it past the end of his suspension

well, Hudler has this mental issue just like every other nhl player, they admire their passes too much and expose themselves to these kinda hits. your boy Chelios did this stuff to players all the time when he was a hab.

so basically people like OlderthanChelios,Gary Bettman and cholly want to elimate hitting,fighting and anyother touchy feeling stuff and play a 60 minute game of power plays,cirus shootout and call penatlies if your oppenent is blowing in your ear or make up crap has they go along.

hockey is suppose to a sport of physical contact. if you do like, dont watch it.

if i’m a ducks fan ill be worried, league has made you a black sheep of the family because flyers and their fan base know all about it….....

Posted by FlyersFan on 05/01/09 at 09:43 PM ET

Luongo-is-my-hero, Umberger clearly LOOKS UP AND SEES STUART before he gets hit. There’s no way that Umberger didn’t know what was coming. He was still in the play when he got hit. Stop making idiotic comparisons to it, because it doesn’t work.

Posted by Justice And Rule on 05/01/09 at 09:43 PM ET

Luongo-is-my-hero:

Don’t be a tool.  Homerism?  Please.  It will be a suspension, write it down, queerbait.  The league has re-defined what is suspendable.  Deal with it.

Who’s home are you guarding?

Posted by Cornholio from USA on 05/01/09 at 09:51 PM ET

Look at all the Wings fans cry like little b*tches! Get over yourselves. Wings fans are the worst fans in the NHL. I know because I use to be one!

Posted by Dipsh*ts from Detroit on 05/01/09 at 10:14 PM ET

if it was late hit, it was a fraction late, right on the boarderline..blindside hits usually look really bad though so it may not matter as perception is reality..also, it looked as if Brown took some serious strides before the hit and was going to annihilate Hudler whether or not he had the puck or not..may or may not factor into the league decision..Hudler DID look at the pass a little too long and might have been able to avoid it or at least minimize the damage..honestly, not sure if this deserves a suspension..it looks bad as hudler is umpa loompa small and because of the play he was bending down making him even smaller..my guess, because it looked really bad and drew blood, Brown gets two games.

Posted by UMFan from Colorado on 05/01/09 at 10:15 PM ET

LOL.  Only reason it was a head hit was cause your boy hudler had his head down admiring his pass instead of expecting a hit like you should in a playoff game.  Heres a tissue, dry your tears.  Mature to call me a queer cause i tell it like it is.

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 05/01/09 at 10:18 PM ET

Regarding Umberger:

(If my computer wasn’t acting up, I’d find the link) but Umberger said afterwards that he saw Stuart coming - he just didn’t know he was coming that fast and thought he had more time.  He fully expected to be hit.

And Columbus was stupid for putting him back in the game wobbly, I think.  You don’t screw around with a head injury.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/01/09 at 10:22 PM ET

As others have said, look at Stuart’s hit on Umberger - Umberger touches the puck and loses it, and it’s 10+ feet away as Stuart delivers a shoulder to his head.

That’s just not true. Stuart backed into Umberger and hit him with his hip. And the puck was almost beneath the two of them a fraction of a second before the hit. The puck wasn’t 10 feet away until Umberger was nearly down on the ice. Umerger got his bell rung because he got the wind knocked out of him, not because he was hit in the head.

Stuart’s hit is a classic example of a clean hit. Brown’s hit and Brashear’s hit are both examples of what the league wants to eliminate…intentional hits to the head.

so basically people like OlderthanChelios,Gary Bettman and cholly want to elimate hitting,fighting and anyother touchy feeling stuff…

Nothing I’ve said here or anyplace else would lead an intelligent person to believe that. Personally, I love a hard-hitting game. It’s one of the reasons the playoffs are what most of us look forward to all year. But there’s a line (and it’s not even a fine line) between hard-hitting hockey and dirty hockey. The Wings specialize in the former. The Quacks specialize in the latter. We’ll just have to wait and see which approach to playoff hockey is the most successful.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 05/01/09 at 10:23 PM ET

OlderThanChelios, watch the video link: at 0:38, Umberger touches the puck and loses it.  Also at 0:38, Stuart hits Umberger, and you can clearly see Umberger, who is leaning forward at this point to try and recover the puck (which is on the other side of Stuart) hit his head on Stuart’s shoulder. That’s what makes him woozy; the diaphragm isn’t connected to the head, so getting the wind knocked out of you doesn’t give you a concussion.

Did Stuart intend to hit Umberger in the head with his shoulder? His doubtful; he meant to lay a good lick on him, but it was Umberger’s positioning which lead to his head being involved.  Look at tonight’s play; as I pointed out before, at the 1:07 mark Hudler releases the puck, and before the time counter hits 1:08 Brown has already laid Hudler out.  Brown was coming from directly in front of Hudler, so he didn’t sneak up on him; it was just that Hudler has his head turned in the opposite direction.  Brown is two” taller than Hudler and was skating completely erect, while Hudler has his head down and turn, making him even shorter relative to Brown. It’s not like Brown came in with his elbow at shoulder height, a la Pronger. So how are the two hits different? Both came within less than a second of the puck being released, both players delivering the hit approached the player they were targeting from in front of them (that Hudler didn’t see Brown coming is because Hudler wasn’t looking in the direction he was skating) and both players came in with their arms at their sides.  (I’m not even fully convinced that Hudler hurt his head on the hit rather than when his head hit the ice)  I think Stuart’s hit was clean, and I think Brown’s hit was clean as well. Obviously other people think differently.  To say it was “obviously” late is not correct, as it’s at best borderline. And to call it a deliberate headshot also seems incorrect, in my opinion.

Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 05/01/09 at 10:39 PM ET

sorry, link’s here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhRU8fAb1lU

Posted by Dan from Pittsburgh, PA on 05/01/09 at 10:40 PM ET

i think it was late…and the penalty was right, maybe not call it interference but a rough or possible charge.  but i think thats all that should be given out. no suspension. as for stuarts hit no way was it late. the puck is right there and he playd it. and no way was it dirty.

Posted by ME on 05/01/09 at 11:07 PM ET

This arguement is silly.  The hit was unecessary.  He (Brown) could have backed off.  But no, “I have to potentially end your hockey career so I can send a message.”.  How utterly childish.  This is a sport, not life or death.  Play hard, be physical.  But don’t try to “punish” a player who’s head is down.  That’s not hockey… that’s a street fight.  It only demeans the game.

Posted by calquake on 05/01/09 at 11:17 PM ET

Look at the video. He gets his arms ready and in position for a devastating hit. That was dirty. He knew he was gonna hit him in the head and tried to do maximum damage.

Posted by CJBear71 on 05/01/09 at 11:22 PM ET

The hit was vicious, but I don’t think Brown intentionally went for Hudler’s head. Brown comes in hard, raises his arms but it’s not DEFINITIVE that he actually made the hit arm/elbow to head. Brown wanted to rock Hudler, but not decapitate him. It feels late at first, but the more you watch you realize that it could only be considered borderline. Hudler was clearly not expecting to be hit, but also wasn’t in a position that made himself vulnerable, as Brown came in from forechecking in the Wings zone. Blaming Hudler (for walking into Brown’s shoulder? really?) is ridiculous. Doing so projects an obvious anti-Wing bias. The check looks bad.  In real time it looks vicious. And the refs decision was completely fair. Because no matter what, Brown rocked Hudler’s head. However, I doubt their be a suspension.

Posted by pilgrim from the ice at the bottom of the world on 05/01/09 at 11:29 PM ET

@Dan, who seems quite reasonable:

Your comparison is very, very off.

1) Stuart plays the body, not the head. While Umberger might hit his head, Stuart nailed him in the body and was not attempting to make an unprotected headshot. Brown was making an unprotected headshot; he didn’t play the body, he led with his forearm-elbow and swung it (You can see the motion) into Hudler’s head.

2) Blindsiding. You say both saw it, but either you didn’t look well enough at the Hudler hit, our you’re just not attempting to remember. Hudler gets completely blindsided, and you can’t argue that. Umberger can see it coming, stated he knew it was coming, and misjudged it. He essentially said it was his fault. Saying that his body was facing Brown is not true (He had just turned up ice to make the pass. Watch the video.) and a poor attempt at justifying the hit.

If you can’t see how they are different, then it’s pointless to argue. People like James Mirtle are rightly comparing it more to another head shot. Why people on this website (And oddly enough, only this website) are attempting to draw parallels to a clear body shot is beyond me.

Posted by Justice And Rule on 05/02/09 at 12:16 AM ET

acutally the more i look at it the more dirty it becomes. Brown was looking to decapitate and on the first replay of the hit it looks like a forearm right to the mellon and from the reverse angle it looks like an elbow. but the way he followed through with the arms and stick pushing outwards in FRONT of his shoulders an body that it was dirty. his arms are out in front before he even gets to hudler. The deserves 3 or 4 games. but lets say he gets suspended 1,2 or whatever what impact did he really have? are they really going to miss him? I’m not sure what depth they have and considering that this guy is a fourth line checking guy i’m sure they can insert somebody to fill that role with the limited amount of minutes that line receives. Its not like this is Getzlaf or pronger.

Posted by ME on 05/02/09 at 12:33 AM ET

Hey “That was a clean hit” Gang - in what era of tht NHL was a hit straight into the head a clean hit.  Hudler’s head went into Brown’s shoulders?  Brown clearly went out of his way to find Hudler’s head with his elbow.  He lunges at him.  Jesus Christ people.

Posted by Jerry from Vancouver on 05/02/09 at 12:34 AM ET

Two for roughing max. Over reaction by the ref’s, Colie will suspend to appease the Illitch’s.

Posted by Tero from Tacoma on 05/02/09 at 12:42 AM ET

your boy hudler had his head down admiring his pass

Ummmm, ok.  So…which one is it?  Did he have his head down or was he admiring his pass?  Because…if he was admiring his pass with his head down, he must have been passing the puck between his feet…

If you’re going to argue, at least PICK an argument that isn’t contradictory…

Posted by Garth on 05/02/09 at 12:42 AM ET

I don’t know…if you give brown a suspension then you have to give hudler a suspension because he took a shot at beauchemin’s head right before that.  They need to just have automatic suspensions for hits to the head to at least make it consistent.

Posted by stoneman from Vegas on 05/02/09 at 02:38 AM ET

If you can’t see how they are different, then it’s pointless to argue.

Exactly, JAR. As the old saying goes, there are none so blind as those who will not see. Comparing Stuart’s hip-first, backing-into-Umberger hit with Brown’s elbow-first, shot-to-the-head on Hudler is just a lame attempt at justifying a dirty hit.

The fact is, Brown had every opportunity to avoid hitting Happy in the head and didn’t. If he simply had lowered his arm and hit him with his hip, we wouldn’t be arguing about this. And Colin Campbell wouldn’t be trying to figure out how many games Brown should be suspended.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 05/02/09 at 07:14 AM ET

The important thing is: Hudler’s head was at the same height since the moment he received the puck. It doesn’t matter if it was up or down, if you have time to line up your hit and you hit in the head the player who hasn’t lowered his head at the last moment, you are aiming for the head. And such hits should carry severe ban.
On many questionable hits this season players lowered their heads at the last moment trying to reach for the puck or to direct it, thereby making it hard for checkers to avoid their heads. This is one of the hits where player had his head at the same height all the time, and checker was aiming for it.

Posted by DR on 05/02/09 at 08:14 AM ET

Wow, a couple things.

- It was interference. At first glance, a major interference call looks odd, I admit that. But if you were watching the game, it was clear it was interference. The puck was up at the Ducks blue line, Hudler was on his side of the red line. By definition, that’s interference.

So for the trolls saying this was in any way Hudler’s fault, shut the hell up. If you’re not even remotely a part of the play anymore, you shouldn’t have to protect yourself from hits coming from the blind side. It’s funny that people are saying Hudler shouldn’t have been “admiring” his pass. Wake up. He was “admiring” his pass to make sure it connected, to ensure he had time to get across ice for his shift change. If the pass doesn’t connect, he’s got to stay out for D-zone coverage.

- Okay, hear me out before you all get mad. But it wasn’t an elbow. Watch the back view a few times. The initial contact from Brown is Brown’s shoulder to Hudler’s head. On the follow-through, you can see from the front angle that Brown’s forearm slams across Hudler’s face.

Chris Pronger would claim that Brown’s shoulder hit Hudler in the head “becuz of fizzix,” being that Brown is taller than Hudler.

But the bottom line remains—shoulder or elbow—Brown came across the ice and hit a player that was in a vulnerable position—and was NOT in the play, not by about a full second and around 35 or 40 feet—and hit him in the head. Honestly, if this play happens when Hudler’s fighting for the puck on the wall, or skating through the neutral zone WITH the puck, I will admit, it’s not nearly as egregious.

But shoulder or elbow, “clean” or “dirty,” it was a hit to the head, there was ample opportunity to avoid it, and being that the puck was long gone, there was no hockey play to be had. So, I agree with the major penalty, I agree with the misconduct.

However, this isn’t like the Brashear hit—which was clearly intent to injure. The decision the NHL has to make is how much do they want to dissuade players from laying hits to the head, clean hits or otherwise, intentional or not? If they want to treat it like hitting from behind, where it’s an automatic penalty in-game whether it’s a hard hit or not, and whether it was intentional or not, then this hit deserves a suspension. If they want to continue determining suspensions status quo, I will admit, as a Wings fan, that this is no more than a one-game suspension, and that honestly, if there weren’t a suspension, I can understand why, based on the NHL’s recent suspension history for similar incidents.

My feeling is that the NHL needs to teach players that hits to the head, of the clean or dirty variety, need to be avoided. In which case, I think Brown should be suspended probably 3 games—less than Brashear because it wasn’t an obvious intent to injure—but more than a single game because it was not just a hit to the head, but a hit to the head that happened away from the puck and long enough after the puck left that it was completely unnecessary.

BUT—is it fair to change the standard right now? When the players have played an entire season under a certain standard? Or should the NHL institute a more zero-tolerance headshot policy in the off-season? Ethically, and practically, it seems like protecting players’ heads should be priority one, regardless of in-season standards. On the other hand, it would be very tough to take, as the Ducks, to see your guy get suspended for way more games than guys were getting suspended for all season long, for similar (or worse) hits.

So, perhaps a compromise—suspend Brown one game, and put all teams left in the playoffs on notice that this will be the LAST hit to the head the league will tolerate, and that any subsequent hits to the head that are either dirty, intent to injure, or come incidentally but outside of the flow of play, will be punished with a minimum of three games, with the possibility of more at the discretion of the league office.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 05/02/09 at 08:35 AM ET

Colie will suspend to appease the Illitch’s.

He might suspend for some other unfair agenda, no doubt, but you tell me, when was the last time the league did anything to appease Ilitch? I think the closest thing we’ve had to that since the lockout is the clause in the CBA that averages the cap hit out. That was probably the one carrot Ilitch has been given since the lockout.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 05/02/09 at 08:37 AM ET

He should definetly be suspended, 5 games at least, the hit was blindside and the puck had already left his stick.

Posted by PuckHound61 from Speckville USA on 05/02/09 at 08:38 AM ET

BUT—is it fair to change the standard right now? When the players have played an entire season under a certain standard? Or should the NHL institute a more zero-tolerance headshot policy in the off-season? Ethically, and practically, it seems like protecting players’ heads should be priority one, regardless of in-season standards. On the other hand, it would be very tough to take, as the Ducks, to see your guy get suspended for way more games than guys were getting suspended for all season long, for similar (or worse) hits.

They have changed rules in mid-stream before, though, or I would agree with you there Nathan.  And I think the argument could be made by the league that such a severe punishment to Brashear should be sufficient notice to other teams that headshots aren’t being taken lightly anymore.

Good observation on the “admiring his pass” comment, too.  Are hockey players supposed to not pay any attention to what is happening to the play because their primary objective is to make sure they aren’t blindsided by a headshot?  I’d rather not - for all teams.  Players should look out for hard hits, not cheap shots.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/02/09 at 08:56 AM ET

Okay, hear me out before you all get mad.

Oh, so now you’re going to try to bring common sense and rational arguments into this discussion. Damn you, Nathan. This is playoff hockey. It’s the hated Quacks. It’s venom and histrionics. If you’re going to be the voice of reason here, what’s left for Baroque to do.

And speaking of Ms. Reason and Sensibility, here she is…

And I think the argument could be made by the league that such a severe punishment to Brashear should be sufficient notice to other teams that headshots aren’t being taken lightly anymore.

I think that’s exactly the point. The Ducks, in particular, should know that they’re going to be under some extra scrutiny because of their style of play (if you want to call “mayhem on ice” a style of play). But, hey, maybe the Quacks hadn’t seen or heard about the Brashear incident. I think they might be able to use the “we’re just too damn dumb to read” argument here.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 05/02/09 at 11:05 AM ET

I am a Wings Fan and i hope Brown does not get a suspension, so he can get some payback on ice. Dirty hit but dont suspend let his punishment be at hands of a wings player.

Posted by Korbillian on 05/02/09 at 12:21 PM ET

A great article with comprehensive angles on the hit:

http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/the-morning-skate-head-shots-continue-in-round-2/

It looks like there was about 1 second between the pass and the hit.  You can see Brown swing the part of his arm between his shoulder and elbow into Huds’ once-pretty face.

It’s a vicious hit, but I bet you don’t see Brown receive any disciplinary action for it.  One second later, sure.  Pure elbow hit, sure.  But I have a feeling a goal (that arguably won the game for us) and a relatively healthy Happy is all we’re going to see out of this.

That is, until Mr. Brown gets back on the ice.

Posted by Hippy Dave from Portland by way of Detroit on 05/02/09 at 12:34 PM ET