“keep your head up.”

or Bettman’s comments from two weeks ago on Edmonton radio, “we need to look over the headshots more. maybe in March” as guys drop like flies. excellent work you legal politicking dildo.

Posted by Death Metal Nightmare from MKE on 02/08/10 at 10:11 PM ET

Send a message. 8 games, $15,000

Posted by gunnar from Ada, MI on 02/08/10 at 10:14 PM ET

There’s no keep your head up about that one, that was cross hairs on a target and nothing else.
Spin the Wheel of Justice.... does the injury dictate the suspension?
Carter is a big name, so does Collie and the gang give him an Ovie like 2 games....?
Regardless, ya have to blame the guys on the ice taking the pot shots. Lack of respect for the other guy, plain & simple.

Posted by MOWingsfan19 on 02/08/10 at 10:20 PM ET

Let’s take a moment to recall what Red Wings GM Ken Holland said in November.

“If a player is coming straight on, the responsibility is on the puck carrier,” Holland said this weekend in Calgary. “If he’s coming from the blindside, the responsibility is on the player delivering the hit. It’s got to be a rule.”

Posted by Muero on 02/08/10 at 10:21 PM ET

“keep your head up.”

Posted by Death Metal Nightmare from MKE on 02/08/10 at 09:11 PM ET

I think you were being sarcastic.  His head was up looking at the net and Carter caught him from the blindside, very similar to how RIchards caught Booth.  In this case, going to the front of the net is inherently dangerous, but getting caught from the blindside after fighting through a check is almost impossible to avoid, unless the hitter avoids doing it. 

I don’t think Carter is a reckless player typically looking for his nightly Sportscenter hit, but something needs to be done.  Maybe the first step, as has been mentioned before, it just getting rid of the hard caps on the pads. Technology has progressed to the point softer pads can be made that are just as protective.

Posted by dip on 02/08/10 at 10:22 PM ET

Let’s take a moment to recall what Red Wings GM Ken Holland said in November.

“If a player is coming straight on, the responsibility is on the puck carrier,” Holland said this weekend in Calgary. “If he’s coming from the blindside, the responsibility is on the player delivering the hit. It’s got to be a rule.”

Posted by Muero on 02/08/10 at 09:21 PM ET

Great quote/ point...I totally agree.

Posted by dip on 02/08/10 at 10:24 PM ET

it was borderline. these are same exact type of hits scott stevens use to give.

Posted by FlyersFan on 02/08/10 at 10:24 PM ET

too bad he still wasent on the wings.

Posted by Bill Stevenson on 02/08/10 at 10:25 PM ET

it’s funny how everyone wants to get rid of these kinda hits and you have former players say on countless radio interviews say hits like the richards hits on booth is keeping people interested in the sport.

I agreed with scott stevens that there shouldn’t be more rules in the game for blows to the head.

i got to laugh at vs. telecast amusing that it was richards who KO’ed Salmela

Posted by FlyersFan on 02/08/10 at 10:33 PM ET

I’m sorry, but this is no different than a sucker punch.  This needs to be taken out of the game.  What Holland said is spot on.

Posted by Riviera on 02/08/10 at 10:36 PM ET

“Keeping people interested in the sport”...at the expense of the lives of the players.

No thanks, I’d rather have less interest in the sport

Posted by BuzzFledderjohn on 02/08/10 at 10:36 PM ET

What the hell is wrong with players now?  Every week there’s another a-hole elbowing some guy in the head from the blindside?  There is seriously something mentally wrong with these guys who have to go out of their way to blindside headhunt a guy.  As a former player and fan of the sport, I’m getting more and more embarrassed for the sport.

Posted by Scott from New York on 02/08/10 at 10:36 PM ET

it was borderline. these are same exact type of hits scott stevens use to give.

Posted by FlyersFan on 02/08/10 at 09:24 PM ET

I completely disagree.  Stevens’ hits were textbook according to the Ken Holland quote.

Posted by dip on 02/08/10 at 10:42 PM ET

i cant believe people are upset over a broken nose and missing a couple of teeth

Posted by FlyersFan on 02/08/10 at 10:45 PM ET

I completely disagree.  Stevens’ hits were textbook according to the Ken Holland quote.

Posted by dip on 02/08/10 at 09:42 PM ET

did i miss the memo that Ken Holland invented hockey?

Posted by FlyersFan on 02/08/10 at 10:46 PM ET

i cant believe people are upset over a broken nose and missing a couple of teeth

Posted by FlyersFan on 02/08/10 at 09:45 PM ET

The fact that he couldn’t move for a few minutes on a hit from behind says enough...who gives a flying **** what the damage was. Take off your Pronger-colored glasses for a second.

Posted by mrfluffy from Cincy on 02/08/10 at 10:50 PM ET

This just in, FlyersFan is a fuching idiot.

Posted by Riviera on 02/08/10 at 10:57 PM ET

The hit is to the shoulder and back. Fast forward to 4:14 and watch the replay. Now, if we want to argue it’s a hit on an unsuspecting player, I’ve got no qualms on that argument. However, before the NHL goes down that path, take into account what the rule the NFL put in on hits to unprotected players has done to defenders there, essentially big hits (which, btw, always show up on NFL Films specials) have been eliminated and games have turned because of the penalty on what defenders have essentially been doing for years.

Posted by phillyd from New Jersey on 02/08/10 at 11:03 PM ET

He was unconscious before he even hit the ice.  He couldn’t move for a while.

He was also completely blindsided.  Doesn’t matter if his head was up or down, he would not have been able to see Carter coming.  This is exactly like the Richards hit.

Posted by cam on 02/08/10 at 11:14 PM ET

Bloody Flyers.  Richards, Carter, Downie when he was there, that talentless goon who took out Bergeron.  Used to be they were just goons, but they beat the snot out of you in a fight.  Now they’re a bunch of cowards.  And FlyersFan, you might the dumbest f*ck I’ve ever seen on this site.  And that’s saying a lot.

Posted by Harrald The Red on 02/08/10 at 11:17 PM ET

I dunno, I wouldn’t say it was a dirty hit in terms of Carter’s intention; but it’s the exact sort of reckless head-shot the league is trying to crack down on. If they suspended Mike Green for his hit on Frolik last week, this one should get a few games too.

Posted by Ben on 02/08/10 at 11:28 PM ET

Typical Flyers with the late hits. They have no respect for other player.

Posted by Bo from FL on 02/08/10 at 11:41 PM ET

The hit is to the shoulder and back. Fast forward to 4:14 and watch the replay. Now, if we want to argue it’s a hit on an unsuspecting player, I’ve got no qualms on that argument. However, before the NHL goes down that path, take into account what the rule the NFL put in on hits to unprotected players has done to defenders there, essentially big hits (which, btw, always show up on NFL Films specials) have been eliminated and games have turned because of the penalty on what defenders have essentially been doing for years.
- phillyd

The rule is different in the NFL because of the way the game is played.  The problem with the rule in the NFL is that a receiver can have his back facing the defender when he catches the ball. In that case it’s catch 22 for the defender.  Back off and make sure the hit is clean and risk missing the tackle and giving up a big play, or hit full force and risk a personal foul.  The rule changes the game because it puts the defense at a disadvantage in a trade off for safety.

There is no compromise in hockey for implementing that rule.  Neither the defense or the offense gains or looses anything from the added burden of caution.  Big hits are still allowed.  Boarding Penalties change the way the game of hockey is played far more than banning blind side hits do, and that’s already been agreed upon for safety reasons.

Posted by ChrisinA^2 from the University of Michigan on 02/08/10 at 11:53 PM ET

This just in, FlyersFan is a fuching idiot.

Posted by Riviera on 02/08/10 at 09:57 PM ET

This just in, FlyersFan is a Flyers fan.

Posted by Incognetis from Exile in Alabama on 02/09/10 at 12:12 AM ET

Whether he had his head up or not, the puck was in the net before Carter even hit him. It was late and it was high.

Posted by Timbits on 02/09/10 at 12:47 AM ET

the hit wasn’t late.  there’s no way a guy can change his mind about throwing a hit in a split second like that.  the reason he got hit in the head is because he was crouched down and the Flyer wasn’t.  if the goalie makes the save, the rebound could be there.  taking the body is the right way to play hockey in that situation.  it comes down to simple respect for your fellow players.  these guys aren’t stupid.  they know they’re going to be able to lay someone out before they do.  it’s up to them to do what it takes to make a check without just freight-training through a guy’s face.

is there anything in the rulebook that makes this technically a penalty, let alone a suspension?  not really.  he didn’t leave his feet, he kept his arms down, etc.  but it was still a hit that should not be in the game.  there’s no reason he couldn’t have eased up a bit or hit him more straight-on body-to-body.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 02/09/10 at 01:14 AM ET

Tom Gulitti- Fire and Ice blog has an update

http://blogs.northjersey.com/blogs/fireice/comments/salmela_has_headache_but_feeling_ok_otherwise/

I didn’t see him coming,” Salmela said.

“First of all, when you can’t remember everything, it’s kind of scary, but it’s easier right now,” he said. “At first you can’t remember if you’re kind of blurry.”

Posted by cam on 02/09/10 at 01:27 AM ET

it’s funny how everyone wants to get rid of these kinda hits and you have former players say on countless radio interviews say hits like the richards hits on booth is keeping people interested in the sport

Except for the former players now suffering or looking ahead apprehensively to suffering the early dementia and other consequences of brain damage, and the current players who have asked the league several times to crack down on hits to the head because they would like to avoid any more brain damage than possible.

And cutting down on big hits hasn’t hurt the popularity or profitability of football any - seems that people are still watching and buying merchandise in pretty large numbers.

The league is going to have to make blows to the head against the rules eventually because the owners will get tired of seeing so much salary and talent on the sidelines for many months (especially since there is an awareness of how important it is for players not to play with any concussion symptoms), careers ended earlier in a long-term contract than they ever expected, or worst-case scenario someone gets knocked into a coma or killed and then the decisions will be made for the league, whether they want any action on head shots or not.  Their hand will be forced if they don’t act themselves.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 02/09/10 at 02:26 AM ET

looked like a pretty brutal head shot.  Most will say it is a clean hit, since he hit him like a micro second after the guy scored, but still have to have respect for other players when u make those hits.  Carter shoudla let up a bit at least.  Man did he fly when he got hit

Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 02/09/10 at 04:37 AM ET

Except for the former players now suffering or looking ahead apprehensively to suffering the early dementia and other consequences of brain damage, and the current players who have asked the league several times to crack down on hits to the head because they would like to avoid any more brain damage than possible…

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 02/09/10 at 01:26 AM ET

Ask Eric Lindros if he remembers any of those big hits…

Posted by mrfluffy from Cincy on 02/09/10 at 07:50 AM ET

Carter was definitely going for a big hit but I don’t think he was looking to do the kind of damage the hit did. It doesn’t seem like he targeted the head, but Salmela was driving the net low, as he should.

I’m just not sure what the point of the hit would be, especially in the mortal combat way it was done. I don’t buy the “protect the rebound” argument because Richards was right there.

Glad to hear the kid is “ok.”

Posted by Osrt on 02/09/10 at 08:59 AM ET

Blind side head shot, after the play was already made. Spin the wheel and see what happens.

Posted by Hockey1919 from Montreal on 02/09/10 at 09:12 AM ET

Maybe I’m watching something different, but I don’t understand the comparison with the richards hit. Richards tracked Booth halfway across the ice, lined him up and leaned into his head. Salmella just kind of turns and collides with Carter, who didn’t lean in at all. Really surprising this hit did that kind of damage.

Posted by steve on 02/09/10 at 09:15 AM ET

I’ve got to go with Muero’s quote reminding us what Holland said.  There is technically nothing wrong about that hit.  The contact was initiated shoulder-to-shoulder on a player who was skating with his head down and the intent to hit was carried out before the goal was scored. 

With Holland’s simple idea that catching a guy with his head down from the front (as Scott Stevens did for the greatest number of his memorable hits) is up to the player getting hit.  Catching a guy from the blind side who never sees you coming is your responsibility not to kill him. 

Right now, there is nothing about what Carter did that was illegal, so he shouldn’t be suspended.  The rule needs to change though to make that hit illegal.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 02/09/10 at 09:55 AM ET

too bad he still wasent on the wings.
Posted by Bill Stevenson on 02/08/10 at 09:25 PM ET

Better to be quiet and let the world assume you are a fool than open your mouth and prove them correct.

Posted by MOWingsfan19 on 02/09/10 at 10:41 AM ET

I don’t see how outlawing this hit wouldn’t outlaw all hits. If you can’t glide into a guy shoulder to shoulder when he’s got the puck five feet away from (and directly in front of) your goalie, then no hit should be legal.

Posted by steve on 02/09/10 at 11:05 AM ET

Harrald the Red = douchenoggle
Bo = clearly lacking certain didactic experiences
Riviera = clearly lacking chromosomes

As a Devils fan, I had nothing wrong with the hit.  It was clean; hit him shoulder to shoulder.  Just Carter’s size and speed rung Anssi’s bell and he was out before he hit the ice.  The real issue about the hit is that it made the Devils defence decidedly weak.  Without Martin and now Oduya, Salavador, White and Salmela were supposed to eat the lion’s share of minutes.  This, unfortuantely thrust AHL talent into big minutes.  Fraser is simply not ready. 

As for those that claim the Flyers are dirty, that’s totally wrong.  They are just like every other team in the Atlantic meaning they play an immensely physical brand of hockey.  That’s why that division is the best in the game.  Love the Devils - Flyers match-ups.  Big hits.  Great goals.  Brodeur at his best.

Posted by Damien from New Jersey on 02/09/10 at 11:38 AM ET

Look, I hate both teams, but that was a cheap shot, it’s headhunting 101, see a guy not looking at you, lower the boom.  Those hits used to be fine in the 70s and 80s when the skating was not as crisp and guys weren’t 6’4” and 235lbs.  Somebody is going to get killed out there eventually if the NHL doesn’t curb these blindsided hits.  Is it really a “necessary part of the game” as Ron Maclean or Don Cherry would tell you, no it isn’t.  I can enjoy a game just as much without a big hit that sends somebody to the hospital.  Come on NHL, get with it, the solution is simple, for every blindside hit, the player who does the hitting is suspended until the player he hit comes back.  Done.

Posted by Rangers Fan from Bel Air MD on 02/09/10 at 11:41 AM ET

Carter didn’t really “lower the boom”. He didn’t explode into Salmella. He didn’t take five or six steps. He didn’t hit him in the head. It’s not late--the puck is still airborn when contact is made. Carter just glided in and gave a routine shoulder hit to a smaller guy when the guy cut in front of his goalie, and the guy’s head hit the ice.

If the first shot hit Emery’s pads and Carter doesn’t take the hit, Salmella puts in an easy rebound and everyone’s asking why Carter didn’t take the man.

If you can’t glide into a guys shoulder when he’s got the puck five feet away from (and directly in front of) your goalie, what hit is legal? Should any hit be?

Posted by steve on 02/09/10 at 12:12 PM ET

The point is blindside versus non blindside.  That was a blindsided hit, Carter had plenty of time to adjust the hit so he didn’t hit him in the face and he didn’t.  To me that’s a hit that shouldn’t be in the game.  As for should any hit be legal, of course most hits are legal.  We only have a few of these each year out of the several thousand hits that occur in the game each year.  The only hits that should be outlawed are blindsided hits.

Posted by Rangers Fan from Bel Air, MD on 02/09/10 at 12:34 PM ET

I get your point, Steve, and it is hard to say one shoulder-to-shoulder hit should be legal while another shouldn’t be, but that’s the way I see it.  Carter could have and should have changed his angle and hit him in a way so as not to jar the player’s head.  Just like you’ll see a half-dozen times a game where a player could board another, but changes his angle at the last minute to finish a check from a less damaging angle, Carter could have done that in the open ice while still taking Salmela out of the play and out of contention for any possible rebound.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 02/09/10 at 01:17 PM ET

@jj: Changing an angle on a slippery little guy like Salmella while he’s at full speed and, himself, changing directions is probably easier said than done. I usually err on the side of ‘suspend the guy,’ but my thought here is Carter made the proper hockey play and could have made this hit much jucier had he wanted to. The outcome’s unfortunate, but it’s just the sort of unfortunate outcome that sometimes happens when small guys cut into traffic at full speed. This same hit happens to Jason Blake on an almost nightly basis, though he’s been fortunate enough to somehow avoid this type of injury.

@Ranger’s fan: This isn’t the Booth hit, where Richard left his assignment, lined Booth up from halfway across the ice, took five steps, adjusted his position to aim for the chin and exploded into it after a long enough delay that Booth was not only not involved in the play, but not in a position he could’ve scored from even if he had been. Salmella has the puck here and cuts right into Carter’s area of responsibility. Carter has to hit him here, whether Salmella sees him or not.

Whether a player is aware of a defender’s presence or not, there is no more appropriate time/location on the ice to throw a body check than to prevent a player from cutting across the front of the net, unimpeded, with the puck on his stick. Carter hits the guy’s shoulder. Contact is made when the puck is still airborne, so it’s not late. This is the right play. If it’s too dangerous to allow shoulder checks on a guy cutting across the front of the net, then bodychecking loses its purpose. Without purpose, it’s no longer strategy, just violence for violence sake and no longer makes sense to allow checking at all.

Posted by steve on 02/09/10 at 01:53 PM ET

I just think it’s amazing that the same people who called Scott Stevens a warrior, for what he did to Eric Lindros, are calling Carter a coward.  Can’t have it both ways people ...either you are for it or against, not one or the other when it does or does not benefit your team ... karma is a b*tch, ain’t Devils fans?

Posted by bob from philadelphia on 02/09/10 at 04:24 PM ET

Bob, are you talking about this hit?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Z7-XRPcrw

These two hits don’t compare.  Stevens caught Lindros with his head down from the front.  Carter caught Salmela from the blind side.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 02/09/10 at 04:46 PM ET

so you are telling me that Scott Stevens never blindsided someone or was never trying to take someone out of a game, with a hit?  If you are, you need to put down the pipe and give your brain a break.  Blindside, frontside, backside, topside, whatever you want to call it ... if you play the way Stevens played, you were trying to intimidate people by hurting others and guess what, it’s part of the game and I always wished he was a Flyer.  If what you are doing is legal by the rules of the game, more power to you and both the Carter and Richards hits, much like Stevens on Lindros, were all legal ... arms down, no extra strides, man with the puck ... period.

Posted by bob from philadelphia on 02/09/10 at 05:04 PM ET

The announcer saying he thought Salmela APPEARED to be out on the way down makes the hit seem worse than it may have been. How on earth can you tell if he was out on the way down? He went down really really fast, faster than would have given him time to catch himself if you ask me. It is fast (his fall to the ice) even in slow motion. The head hitting the ice looks far more powerful than Carter’s shoulder hitting Salmela’s shoulder and far more likely to be something that knocks him out. In fact it isn’t until after he hits the ice with his head head that he really stops moving. To me, it appears he is out after that… so… boo to the announcers planting ideas in people heads.

I don’t think Carter’s hit was bad for many of the reasons others have already pointed out and had Salmela’s head not hit the ice face first I suspect there would be no injury and we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all. How can you suspend players for that? That would be a bad move by the NHL… suspending for the result instead of the play itself.

Posted by clownfat from seattle on 02/09/10 at 05:53 PM ET

I don’t think Carter’s hit was bad for many of the reasons others have already pointed out and had Salmela’s head not hit the ice face first I suspect there would be no injury and we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all. How can you suspend players for that? That would be a bad move by the NHL… suspending for the result instead of the play itself.

Another good reason for banning blindside hits is in bold.  Yeah, you can’t suspend someone for doing something that is legal (if this was in a league that followed its rules).  Doesn’t mean that the rules shouldn’t be changed or the hit wasn’t bad.

Posted by ChrisinA^2 from the University of Michigan on 02/09/10 at 06:09 PM ET

so you are telling me that Scott Stevens never blindsided someone or was never trying to take someone out of a game, with a hit?  If you are, you need to put down the pipe and give your brain a break.

Not saying that at all, just if you’re going to compare hits, make sure that you’re comparing a blindside hit to a blindside hit.  Yeah, Scott Stevens crossed the line between clean, aggressive hits and questionable, dirty hits some times.  When he did, he should have been suspended.

Also, just because Scott Stevens sometimes made dirty plays doesn’t make it ok for anybody else to.  When you try to injure somebody, you’re not playing within the rules of the game.  That’s why there’s a misconduct for intent to injure.  Unfortunately, the line between intent to intimidate and intent to injure gets blurred plenty of times.  I don’t think Carter intended to injure Salmela like he did, but I have a problem with blindsided contact high on a person’s body.  I accept that it’s currently legal, I just want it out of the game.

Also, the Richards hit should have been a suspension.  I don’t care how you try to sugarcoat that thing, that was a clear hit to the head.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 02/09/10 at 06:50 PM ET

I’d have been okay with Richards getting a couple games suspension, his was much more border line than Carter’s.  Problem is, Carter’s hit changed the mo of the game and if something is clean by the rules and gives your team some life, it’s hard to tell a guy not to do it.  If the rules get changed to ban blows to the head you are going to take some of the speed and contact out of the game, as guys will always be second guessing themselves ... it’s what’s happening in the NFL with all the protection of the QB.  If you want hockey without violent contact, watch the European leagues.  The physical intimidating nature of the NHL is what makes it the hardest professional league in the world to succeed in ...

Posted by bob from philadelphia on 02/11/10 at 11:26 AM ET