this hit is so similar to the petrovicky from years back. richards never left his feet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd3gmPkVtk8&feature=player_embedded

Posted by FlyersFan on 10/24/09 at 08:04 PM ET

I’m waiting for the first comment that “he shouldn’t have been admiring his pass,” although David Booth isn’t from Europe, so it might take a couple more minutes.

I hope he’s okay.  That was horrible and concussions can take a long time and leave lasting effects even after a player retires.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 10/24/09 at 08:13 PM ET

nothing dirty about it. he JUST let go of the puck and didn’t have his head up. and it was led with the shoulder. it’s hockey. of course let’s hope he is ok.

Posted by klaman on 10/24/09 at 08:21 PM ET

he shouldn’t have been admiring his pass!!!  happy now?

Posted by FlyersFan on 10/24/09 at 08:25 PM ET

funny part is, Scott Stevens is going to the hall of fame because of hits like that.

Posted by FlyersFanc on 10/24/09 at 08:32 PM ET

He wasn’t admiring his pass. And Booth’s head was not down when he was hit.

Posted by Booby Clarke on 10/24/09 at 09:06 PM ET

Dirty hit.  Richards alters the trajectory of his hit to line up with Booth’s head.

The real sticking point is that this may be ruled a legal hit.  Once again, NHL owners and union leadership refuse to get dangerous hits out of the game.

Posted by Matt from Ottawa on 10/24/09 at 09:08 PM ET

Technically, it looks like a legal hit.  But, it seems unnecessary and it was definitely a head shot.  I’m tired of watching people get carried off on stretchers.  With ex-NFL players developing encephalopathy and dementia in their fifties, we really need to take concussions and brain injuries seriously.

Posted by PDXWing on 10/24/09 at 09:22 PM ET

I agree PDXWing and the thing is, Richards got 5 for interference so the NHL can expound on that and take it from there.

I am going to say anywhere between 3-5 games on this one.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 10/24/09 at 09:33 PM ET

there is no rules about blows to the head from the shoulder in the rulebook.  this is a clean hit.

There was no intent.  Richards shoulder was down, booth dropped his head. He didn’t leave his feet to deliver a shot to the head. richards cant anticipate that booth drops his head in an split second.

If you want to get rid of concussions and these ‘violent hits’ then you need then to outlaw all forms of hitting.

Posted by FlyersFan on 10/24/09 at 10:03 PM ET

I agree as well:  Plain and simple, it was a head shot, ‘nuff said….

Posted by Tony from Virginia Beach, VA on 10/24/09 at 10:05 PM ET

Update on Booth and HD video of the hit added to this post.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 10/24/09 at 10:05 PM ET

All Richards had to do was square his shoulders and hit Booth with his chest, like kids are taught to hit, and it would have been clean. Instead he chose to lunge at Booth’s head with his shoulder like the dirty POS he is.

Posted by Kstewy16 on 10/24/09 at 10:19 PM ET

Pure leadership

Posted by pensfan29 on 10/24/09 at 10:43 PM ET

But I thought Mike Richards WAS leadership?!?  That means it can’t be anything other than a clean legal awesome hit that almost took someone’s head off!  Right?!?

This is getting to be too much.  Second bad hit in as many nights, 4 intents to injure (including 2 slew foots) in the last week and a half.  The NHL has to do something to clamp down on this shit before someone get’s really hurt.

Posted by stoneman from Vegas on 10/24/09 at 10:57 PM ET

Good thing Richards is stonewalling the media for talking about his nightlife so he won’t have to answer for this headshot.

Posted by Timbits on 10/24/09 at 11:33 PM ET

Good thing Richards is stonewalling the media for talking about his nightlife so he won’t have to answer for this headshot.

he actually talked to media for three minutes then ran out the backdoor to warm the car up for the rest of his crew so they can hit the bars before the speicals were over.

Posted by FlyersFan on 10/24/09 at 11:40 PM ET

“If you want to get rid of concussions and these ‘violent hits’ then you need then to outlaw all forms of hitting.”

Not true at all. Start punishing players when they hit a player in the head and you’ll see them get a bit more careful about their checks.

We all need to remember that body checks are meant as a way to get a player off the puck or out of the flow of the game if they just released the puck. They weren’t meant to be hits that knocked players out so they could make the highlight reel on Rock Em Sock Em Hockey 828.

Posted by Shane Giroux from Saskatoon on 10/25/09 at 01:07 AM ET

Yes it was a blinside hit, but it was clean.  Had Booth gotten up, I doubt that it would have been anything more than a 2 minute penalty.  The reality is that a hit to the head is dangerous, and therefore you have to look into possibly penalizing hits to the head. 
Granted, it eliminates a part of the game, but with the game’s speed and the need to protect skilled players, eliminating hits like that will, long term, be beneficial to the league.

Posted by bsalamon on 10/25/09 at 10:35 AM ET

funny part is, Scott Stevens is going to the hall of fame because of hits like that.

Um, seriously? Scott Stevens got into the Hockey Hall of Fame for being one of the greatest defensive defensemen ever to play in the NHL (well, that and the three Stanley Cup championships he captained to the New Jersey Devils to in nine year period, but because you’re a Flyers fan and thus haven’t seen Lord Stanley’s Cup in over thirty years, your over sight is understandable). While it may be true that Scott Stevens is remembered by the majority of the hockey fanbase at large for his hitting (with many of the more memorable hits immortalized on YouTube for eternity), it was just one of many elements that comprised his game that made his career worthy of induction into the Hall of Fame. When Scott Stevens was acquired by the Devils in 1991, he was a well known around the hockey league for both his hitting and his above-average offensive ability. It wasn’t until a few years later, when Jacques Lemaire arrived in New Jersey for his first tenure as head coach, that Stevens began to retool his game, turning his focus away from the offensive aspect of the game and devoting to more focus on honing defensive skill. Stevens would never again put up the kind of numbers offensively as he had earlier in his career, but from that time on their were few defensemen better than Scott Stevens in their own end. He may not have scored as many goals as the many defensemen that would win the Norris Trophy over him during the peak of his career, but he probably prevented more goals during his time as a Devil than all of them combined. Stevens was also one of the greatest, though, in my opinion, overlooked, leaders in the history of the NHL. It hardly surprises me that Stevens’ leadership abilities recieved little to no attention while other NHL captains of Stevens’ era, such as the Red Wings’ Steve Yzerman or the Rangers’ Mark Messier, became the darlings of the hockey media. Stevens’ aggressive play on the ice, intimidating physical presence and thinly veiled disdain for the media made him the polar opposite of players like the personable, accommodating Yzerman and Messier, a charmer and a showboat. Even so, Stevens was one of the intangible forces that galvanized the Devils and propelled the team to greater heights than many thought it would ever reach. His physical toughness and hard-nosed approach to the game inspired the players who played under him, and he came to play every night, regardless of whether it was a regular season game or Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final. He led the charge from the front. His ability to change the momentum of a game or a series at will is nothing short of astounding, regardless of the method by which he did it.

As for Mike Richards’ hit on David Booth, my verdict is that it was not only clean, but unworthy of both the five-minute penalty and ten-minute misconduct. It’s my personal opinion that the officials issue both penalties when no penalty had actually occurred as a knee-jerk reaction to a player not only being knocked unconscious, but being removed from the ice from a stretcher. I think that part of the reason that the on-ice officials and supplementary discipline committee (also known as Colin Campbell’s kangaroo court of hockey justice) base their rulings on the severity of the injury resulting from a play rather than the legality of said play (which, in all honestly, is what they should be focusing on in the case of legal plays that result in unfortunate, rather than intentional, injuries) has to do with Gary Bettman’s post-lockout ‘new’ NHL attempt to ‘clean up’ hockey’s image as a violent, barbaric sport in an effort to make the game more palatable to the casual fan and the rest of politically correct mainstream America. Which I find ridiculous. I mean, if you’re going to punish a player for play that is legal under the NHL rulebook as it currently stands because another player was injured (criteria which I don’t believe exists in the rulebook, though I could be wrong), what’s the point of even having a rulebook in the first place? Either make the play illegal or stop punishing players who haven’t done anything wrong. Then again, if last year’s playoffs were any indication, the NHL won’t even enforce the penalties that exist in it’s current rulebook, so either way they’re undermining their own authority.

Posted by kellyn on 10/27/09 at 11:11 PM ET

The only reason this is brought up is because Booth got injured . There’s nothing illegal about the hit . It’s not even dirty . It’s a straight him that could have been avoided if the receving party (aka Booth) was paying attention to his play on the ice .
That was a hard hit no doubt but worthy of a penalty or suspension ? not at all . Richards feets didn’t leave the ice too .
It’s just a plain bad accident .

Posted by ChristIan from Montreal on 10/28/09 at 09:57 AM ET