How about teams stop putting guys on salary to be “tough guys” and just get people who actually play the game…

Posted by pgoody on 03/07/10 at 05:54 PM ET

Not good at all, could be up to 5 games or so…. He already got suspended 2 games back in Nov. for the hit on Anisimov, plus another two games for a hit on Scott Walker….

Posted by Tony from Virginia Beach, VA on 03/07/10 at 05:57 PM ET

Yes, that was a really nasty “hit” by Cooke. Nothing short of a suspension will do in my opinion.

Should be an easy case to handle for Campbell.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 03/07/10 at 05:59 PM ET

That was pretty friggin ugly - - Put his shoulder square on Savard’s head - -  well after the shot was off.

I agree with Tony.  5 games.

Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Quest for 12 on 03/07/10 at 06:02 PM ET

pgoody are you kidding me? Matt Cooke has 12 goals and 25 points and is an effective agitator and a solid hitter. He takes plenty of abuse and he does fight every now and then.

He’s a 3rd line agitator who hits hard and plays hard and scores 15 goals a year before. Caps fans were not happy at all to see him walk via free agency 2 years ago, and a lot of Canucks fans still are big Cooke fans.

Now, as for the hit… Cooke will probably get suspended because of his history. He plays on the edge and this sort of thing happens because of it, but this was not an intentional head shot. And someone tell me how this hit is any different from Mike Richards’ hit on David Booth. It’s the same hit and Richards didn’t get suspended. Cooke will though because he has a history, which is ridiculous.

Watching the Pens’ postgame show right now and Crosby just said that you have to treat each scenario individually and that at some point there has to be a clear rule on this. Right now, there isn’t. If a star forward does this and not a 3rd line agitator like Matt Cooke, I would be willing to bet he doesn’t get suspended.

Put head shots in the rulebook like the IIHF and make it clear what’s allowed and what isn’t.

Posted by LGP8771 on 03/07/10 at 06:04 PM ET

Very very similar of Richards hit on Booth. Unfortunatly for the game Richards got nothing.

Posted by Pierre from Sherbrooke on 03/07/10 at 06:05 PM ET

If you have to use a washing machine part to describe your role on the hockey team…

Posted by pgoody on 03/07/10 at 06:07 PM ET

Not quite as juicy, but fundamentally the same hit as Richards on Booth. Richards should have gotten 5+ games. Cooke will, and it will be well-deserved.

To the first commentor—Cooke is not a “tough guy” (point in fact, he’s probably more of a coward), he’s got as much or more ability than most third-liners, which is why his frequent marginal play is so dangerous. There’s not any real danger of a guy like Marc Savard getting lined up by a “tough guy” like Raitis Ivanens, for instance, because the later’s simply not good enough to catch the former.

Dirty guys that can actually skate (Cooke, Richards, Ott, Buttercup) are the ones that end up hurting people.

Posted by steve on 03/07/10 at 06:10 PM ET

Now, as for the hit… Cooke will probably get suspended because of his history. He plays on the edge and this sort of thing happens because of it, but this was not an intentional head shot. And someone tell me how this hit is any different from Mike Richards’ hit on David Booth. It’s the same hit and Richards didn’t get suspended. Cooke will though because he has a history, which is ridiculous.

Yes, we all pretty much agree that Richards should have been suspended for his hit on Booth, just like Cooke should get suspended for this.  Unfortunately, Cooke does have a history of hits like this, so his suspension should be longer.

This is not ridiculous.  Cooke needs to stop hitting people like this.  Until he does, the terms of his suspensions should continue to grow.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/07/10 at 06:16 PM ET

Now, as for the hit… Cooke will probably get suspended because of his history. He plays on the edge and this sort of thing happens because of it, but this was not an intentional head shot. And someone tell me how this hit is any different from Mike Richards’ hit on David Booth. It’s the same hit and Richards didn’t get suspended. Cooke will though because he has a history, which is ridiculous.

I agree about the player qualities of Cooke. That’s indisputable compared to other agitators and enforcers, who offers far less in terms of production. And yes, Richards did almost the exact same thing to Booth. But you can’t punish Richards retroactively, nor make that kind of hits legal, so what is the league supposed to do? This “hit” is punishable by a suspension. Pretending otherwise is nonsensical.

And I think it’s ridiculous homerism to claim that there wasn’t something intentional about Cooke’s course on the ice. Had Crosby been victimized by a “hit” like this, I would label it intentional and dirty (plus quite a bit of cursing). Excusing it because Cooke happens to be a Penguin is irrational and makes us look like complete fools.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 03/07/10 at 06:18 PM ET

Word Moq, word.

Posted by Mullet_Revival on 03/07/10 at 06:21 PM ET

Had Crosby been victimized by a “hit” like this…

Bite your tongue, Heaven forbid!

Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 03/07/10 at 06:25 PM ET

Just because a bad non-decision was made earlier (Richards on Booth) doesn’t mean that the best option is to continue making the same poor non-decision over and over and over.  Cooke should be suspended.

And the fact that he is an effective hockey player makes this situation even more infuriating to me.  He helps his team by what he can do on the ice hockey-wise - he doesn’t have to pull this kind of crap because he can actually do things that require some level of skill and talent.  He isn’t just a big dumb meathead on the ice, so he shouldn’t act like one.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 03/07/10 at 06:27 PM ET

What I want to know is why the refs didn’t call anything on that.

Posted by WingsFanInBeanLand from Lidstrom's head telling him 1 more year on 03/07/10 at 06:32 PM ET

@ Baroque

See, now you come over to this tread and talk hockey with a lot of insight and common sense. Big big crush.

Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 03/07/10 at 06:32 PM ET

Obviously I am in the minority but that was a clean hit.  It was to the head which is a no-no but it was literally only a couple inches from shoulder to shoulder which is nearly impossible to aim at that speed and timing.  Scott Stevens made a career with these hits and was applauded for them.  Today’s fans don’t want anything physical.

I don’t see how this is can be a suspension as it doesn’t fall into any of their “criteria”

It was a shoulder
It was not late (watch it again it…he was still in his follow-through)
He did not leave his feet
Perhaps one could call it a deliberate attempt to injure but so could any hit which results in an injury…and countless that don’t.

You give a suspension to this one and you take physicality out of the game.  Boychuk hit Stajan with a “shoulder to the head” and everyone loved that one.  Why is this different?

Posted by Mr. Nasty on 03/07/10 at 06:42 PM ET

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U7jUbKQYdw

Most of these guys were injured for a period of time but then it was acceptable.  Nowadays, any hit that results in injury becomes a controversy and a lengthy discussion.

Posted by Mr. Nasty on 03/07/10 at 06:51 PM ET

The Richards hit on Booth - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIXcGOr4-04

The Cooke hit is way dirtier, he meant to hit his head with his elbow. Richards hit a guy with his shoulder. Cooke hit him with his elbow after the shot.

I’m fine with physical play, but Cooke crossed the line. 5 games should be the minimum, if not 10, or as long as Savard is out.

Posted by ScottyMac on 03/07/10 at 06:52 PM ET

The problem is that now so much more is being learned about the long-term brain damage that results even from what used to be termed “mild concussions” (and the doctors don’t like using that term anymore because they don’t like the word “mild” associated with “brain damage”).  There are two things that no athlete should ever f*** around with because of the potential long-term consequences for quality of life - and those are the brain and the heart.  Knee ligaments can be repaired, broken bones can be fixed, torn muscles can be reattached, heck even with all his ankle and foot issues Forsberg would be fine if it wasn’t for playing hockey - it won’t keep him from having a good, long and fulfilling retirement after he finally leaves the game.

Brain damage and heart damage have long-term negative consequences that can shorten a life and drastically reduce the quality of what remains.  Having one’s bell rung used to be brushed off before people started to realize how serious it is.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 03/07/10 at 06:55 PM ET

What I want to know is why the refs didn’t call anything on that.

Posted by WingsFanInBeanLand from Earth. on 03/07/10 at 06:32 PM ET

Because the Pens are Bettman’s children, and Crosby is the face of the NHL.  That’s why they get away with infractions other teams do not.

Posted by Stealth from USA on 03/07/10 at 06:57 PM ET

Cooke should be suspended. As big of an issue as this has been all season long, any player that hits the head of another player, especially when it’s a star player being hit, should expect to be suspended.

Of course, if he’s not, or if it’s only a game or two, I wouldn’t be surprised either. After all, just yesterday an article on this blog quoted the following:

“The question really is, when a shoulder makes contact with the head, is that going to be termed illegal — because right now, it’s legal,” said Colin Campbell, the N.H.L. vice president for hockey operations

Posted by penguinsfan on 03/07/10 at 06:57 PM ET

Why does Scott Stevens have to be brought up every time a hit like this happens?  Stevens didn’t “make his career” on blindside hits to the head.  He made his career on catching people with their heads down from the front.  There is a huge difference between blindside hits and frontside hits.

Want to use a comparison for this type of hit, how about Claude Lemieux?

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/07/10 at 06:58 PM ET

Updated the post, Savard did suffer a concussion but did not go to the hospital.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 03/07/10 at 07:08 PM ET

1.Stevieboy777
boston
March 7th, 2010
12:13 amANAM, the psyche tssting company of the U.S. troops, the retired NFL alumni, CHUBB, the NHL workers comp provider and the NHL dental association, support the use of a corrective mouth guard now the feature of a Journal of Dental Traumatology peer reviewed paper. Many team dentists and NHL players have been evaluated and fitted with this innovative aide in the prevention of concussion. The Washington Caps system lost approximatley 146 games due to the longterm layoff of players. Since evaluation and fitting over a season and one half, just three games missed due to concussion. CHUBB has initiated a program to fit prone players. This model should be used throughout the league.The Academy of Sports Dentistry, the NHL dental associations main group, has peer reviewed the data. Congress is now considering imposing a mandate of this protocol used and developed by the N.E.Patriots:

“What do we do? Is there any way we can arrest the problem and reduce concussions?”

Until this is addressed, concussions will spin out of control, a science based on the boxers “Glass Jaw” makes common sense. Boxers who develop this condition, tend to get Ko’d more easily after each event. This runs in line with the fact that once you have one concussion your six time, twelve time the odds worsen with each event. Translation, as each player becomes more prone, rates will climb.
Cantu stated in testimoney, blows to the jaw are an issue. Bobby Orr stated, shoulder hits to the face are like a boxers blow. Securing the jaw from inside the mouth, protecting the skull base from jawbone energy transmission, is someting a helmet can’t do.

“What do we do? Is there any way we can arrest the problem and reduce concussions?”

Other products, UA, Brainpad, shock doctor, PPM, common custom mouth guards do not address issues related to temporal mandibular joint health.

“What do we do? Is there any way we can arrest the problem and reduce concussions?”

This may be part of the answer, its works in the NFL, NHL/AHL and it was reported by Mick Colagio of the N.E. Hockey Jounal Brain Pothier and Bruins who have recemtly recovered well from longterm layoff.

story links

http://fourthandgoalunites.com...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Posted by Steve777 from Boston on 03/07/10 at 07:09 PM ET

As big of an issue as this has been all season long, any player that hits the head of another player, especially when it’s a star player being hit, should expect to be suspended.

The additional consequence of taking out the star player(s) of other teams is putting a target on our best players for retaliation.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 03/07/10 at 07:18 PM ET

Dirty hit. Cooke used his elbow. Richards and Carter used their shoulders.

Chara should of chased Crosby all over the ice and crosscheck him in the back of the neck and kill him. It shows you how tough those ‘big bad’ bruins are on the ice.

Posted by FlyersFan on 03/07/10 at 07:22 PM ET

Thanks for the story find, Steve.  I remember hearing about the Patriots using this system a while back and thought it was interesting.  I’m glad people are moving forward with an idea that looks to have a lot of promise for reducing concussions.

To run it ad nauseum, I still think the best idea about hits like this is from Ken Holland.  His idea is that, in hits like this, the fault changes depending on the situation.  If you catch a guy from the front, skating with his head down and crush him, then it shouldn’t be a penalty or suspension.  If you catch a guy on the blind side with his head down, it’s your responsibility to not kill him.  This way, you don’t eliminate hitting or punish guys for good hockey plays, you just take the cheap bullshit out.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/07/10 at 07:30 PM ET

The Richards hit probably should have lead to a suspension, but the Cooke hit is a whole different thing. While Richards hit Booth with the top of his shoulder, Cooke hit Savard with the middle of his arm, because he was raising his elbow. It actually looks like he tried to make an even dirtier hit.

Posted by Andy from FightNight on 03/07/10 at 07:42 PM ET

Pens Fans:

Props for coming out and calling it fairly. 

Nice work.  When I saw the 27 comments, I was sure that some would defend it.  Proved me wrong and I couldn’t be happier to be faulty.  Solid work, posters.  Solid work.  Even the total scumbags from ThePensBlog.com got it right.  That’s shocking. 

Feel bad for Savard.  He’s such a small guy and had no idea that that was coming.  This will, sadly, have a massive impact on Boston’s playoff hopes.  With a concussion, one must assume he’s out for at minimum two weeks.  Not ideal timing for a team with offensive woes.  Here’s to a speedy recovery.

Posted by Unicorn Force from DC (but like everyone here, I'm not a local) on 03/07/10 at 07:46 PM ET

Spin the elbow/shoulder/head thing however you want, the fact still remains that the hit was also undeniably LATE.  There was no “finishing your check” with it, the “check” didn’t start until the puck was already away.

Stupid play by a player with an already-poor reputation.  It really is that simple.

Posted by Primis on 03/07/10 at 07:52 PM ET

For the people who say he used his elbow, you know nothing. Cooke tucked his arm. That’s perfectly fine. He did not extend his elbow. It’s not a hit I like to see and he should be suspended for a few games, but to say he extended his elbow is wrong.

And please stop with the Bettman loves Crosby stuff. Boston had four straight power plays today, including three in the first period. Get your facts straight before you start your lame conspiracy talk. By conspiracy, I mean ‘we know our teams can’t beat the Penguins when it counts, so we’ll create b.s. theories to make ourselves feel better.’

Posted by cs6687 on 03/07/10 at 07:59 PM ET

And please stop with the Bettman loves Crosby stuff. Boston had four straight power plays today, including three in the first period. Get your facts straight before you start your lame conspiracy talk. By conspiracy, I mean ‘we know our teams can’t beat the Penguins when it counts, so we’ll create b.s. theories to make ourselves feel better.’

Amen.  enough with the copy and pasting of reasons to bash the Penguins and Crosby…its’ all getting pretty tired, and seems more like that lame joke someone at a party keeps telling until he gets a laugh.

Dirty hit for sure…

Posted by Greg on 03/07/10 at 08:06 PM ET

Can always count on cs6687 to miss the point…

Posted by Unicorn Force from DC (but like everyone here, I'm not a local) on 03/07/10 at 08:18 PM ET

Suspend until the recipient of a dirty hit comes back. For repeat offenders, leave their salaries on the books to impact cap space.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 03/07/10 at 08:24 PM ET

Yep, I’m tired of these dangerous, lack of respect plays being “legal.”  No, there was no elbow involved. He didn’t jump into the hit. And I wouldn’t even call it a late hit either.

But the player was vulnerable and Cooke knew it. He sees nothing but numbers as Savard winds up for the shot. He even just nonchalantly skates by pretending nothing happened.

I’d suggest throwing the book at him. But since all the league has to go by is that little flowchart, I’m afraid it would just blow away in the wind.

A certain class of players have clearly shown they have no respect for the others on the ice. It’s long past time the rules step in to protect them.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 03/07/10 at 08:34 PM ET

I don’t know if I’d suspend until the recipient comes back, but I would say 10 game minimum automatic suspension. Increase it if there is a past history of dirty hits. Mandatory minimums. Not always popular, but they need it. This is getting out of hand.

Posted by detroitdan1982 from St. John's, NL on 03/07/10 at 08:35 PM ET

The NHL need to put into the rule book against blows to the head. it needs to carry the same weight as going after the players knees. Players need to be forced to stop taking head shots

Posted by Randy from Butler PA on 03/07/10 at 08:36 PM ET

I can’t wait till the day someone lines up Matt Cooke and takes him out, I am sick and tired of his dirty antics, he did not have to make that hit. Unacceptable and he should be suspended. Throw the book at this clown, he is disgrace.

Posted by goon from Grand Forks, ND on 03/07/10 at 08:50 PM ET

The NHL needs to adopt the IIHF rule of no hits to the head. Those who argue that having a rule like that will take physicality out of the game are delusional. Just look at the Olympic hockey games which were very physical, fast, and hard hitting without the shenanigans.

Will a guy like Chara get burned occasionally? Yeah, and that sucks but I’d much rather that happen than see someone sustain a serious injury to the head.

Posted by Bobo the Clown on 03/07/10 at 08:56 PM ET

The problem is that now so much more is being learned about the long-term brain damage that results even from what used to be termed “mild concussions”

Ah, thanks Baroque looks like my job here is already done for me.  I basically say the same thing in every hit-to-the-head thread I make it to.

Posted by MarkK from Maryland on 03/07/10 at 08:57 PM ET

But since all the league has to go by is that little flowchart, I’m afraid it would just blow away in the wind.

“Dammit, Pronger!”

Posted by Incognetis from Delaware... Hi... I'm in... Delaware on 03/07/10 at 09:09 PM ET

Doctors now call concussions “traumatic brain injury,” because it’s serious.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 03/07/10 at 09:40 PM ET

Can always count on cs6687 to miss the point…

No, like all hockey fans from DC, you’re misguided. He hit Savard with his upper arm with his arm tucked into his body. That’s not an elbow. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t like to see any player target another player’s head. It’s unnecessary and very dangerous. By NHL rules, that’s a legal hit. He shouldn’t be suspended for that very reason, but he will because of his reputation.

Posted by cs6687 on 03/07/10 at 09:59 PM ET

that hit was not cookes fault.  he can’t help it savard has a girl neck.  OLD TIME HOCKEY.

Posted by yeah from wherev on 03/07/10 at 10:03 PM ET

I’d suspend him for 8-10 games because of his history. Obviously he didn’t learn anything from his other suspension, so give him a longer one.

Posted by Kstewy16 on 03/07/10 at 11:38 PM ET

Sickening, where were the Bruins to send the appropriate message to Cooke. Cooke is a puke, he has been pulling this crap for years. Someone needs to take care of him properly!!!

Posted by Timbits on 03/08/10 at 01:19 AM ET

timbits, there were 5 minutes left in a game where they were down by 1 goal.  no sense in taking a bunch of stupid penalties on a play where even cooke wasnt penalized.

the bruins play the pens again soon, although i cant imagine cooke will be in the lineup because this sissy league will probably suspend him for playing like a man.

Posted by yeah from wherev on 03/08/10 at 01:41 AM ET

There was no elbow. It was shoulder to head and not late, but I don’t care if this is not currently illegal, Cooke should get at least 5 games (though I thought Lapierre should have gotten 10 and he only got 4, so I guess we’ll see).

Posted by steve on 03/08/10 at 06:04 AM ET

@cs6687

Misguided…Right.  I love your absolutisms…  You’ve got it all figured out.  You’re a big winner!

I’m curious.  What sort of didactic experiences have you had in your life?

Posted by Unicorn Force from DC (but like everyone here, I'm not a local) on 03/08/10 at 08:21 AM ET

By NHL rules, that’s a legal hit. He shouldn’t be suspended for that very reason, but he will because of his reputation.

So you don’t think Cooke had intent to injure?

His reputation says otherwise.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/08/10 at 08:43 AM ET

Credit to the Pittsburgh Post-gazette writers for not being homers about this hit. See here and here.

Posted by steve on 03/08/10 at 09:28 AM ET

Stealth and FlyersFan win morons of the year awards.
Stealth for the tired, old, and intensely stupid, “Pens are Bettman’s kids,” tripe;
And FlyersFan for, well, just being a stupid Flyers fan calling for Chara to chase someone around and crosscheck them in back of the neck.  Why?  To stop Crosby from torching the Cryers for two-points per game and knocking them out of the playoffs for a third straight year?  And, for the record, it’s “should have,” not “should of,” you dolt.

Posted by Puckhead from Jersey, you dolts! on 03/08/10 at 11:12 AM ET

Anyone who has ever played can intuit Cooke’s intent with that hit. The punishment for these types of infractions (hits to the head, as well as the knees) should be a dozen games, or the number of games the injured player misses, whichever is the greater of the two.
Ninety nine percent of the players in the league are respectful of each others careers. Then there are the Cookes. Their behavior can be modified with a more severe disciplinary code.

Posted by rs on 03/08/10 at 12:05 PM ET

I thought the hit was a cheap shot.  How the refs didn’t see this is beyond me.  The Bruins lack of physical response also told a story.  Interestingly enough Don Cherry called them out for a lack of physical play while he was on NESN (the network that televises the B’s) last week.  I commented on it on my blog: derekogrady.wordpress.com

Posted by DerekO'G on 03/08/10 at 01:22 PM ET

You’ve got it all figured out.  You’re a big winner!

Thank you. I do have it all figured out here. I didn’t like Cooke’s hit. It was dangerous. But I think some people are going overboard when it comes to suggesting punishments. Those people who are calling for 10+ games are overreacting. There have been far worse hits that have gone without suspensions (see Mike Richards and Mike Green, for example). Should he be suspended based on the rulebook? No, because there is no rule against what he did.

Some people dislike the Penguins and/or Cooke so much that this is the chance to see the Penguins get punished. That’s part of what it comes down to.

Posted by cs6687 on 03/09/10 at 12:16 PM ET

Should he be suspended based on the rulebook? No, because there is no rule against what he did.

Intent to injure.

Some people dislike the Penguins and/or Cooke so much that this is the chance to see the Penguins get punished. That’s part of what it comes down to.

Or, maybe some people who had similar things to say about comparable hits (seriously, check those threads) just want cheap headshots eliminated from the game.

Seriously, who sounds like a conspiracy theorist now?  It’s not possible for people to be objective when it comes to the Penguins.  The whole world is out to get you.  Nobody was crying for punishment when people who aren’t Penguins fans did things like this. 

For the record, Cooke is a repeat offender.  Whether or not you agree about the hit on Anisimov being clean, he has a record, so he deserves a longer suspension than Richards or Green did (also, I thought Green did get a game for his elbow?). 

Yes, blah blah blah, Richards didn’t get suspended.  We can continually beat this horse into the ground or we could do the grownup thing and stop using this faulty logic to say that two wrongs somehow make a right.  You can’t be magnanimous and say you didn’t like the hit before saying Cooke shouldn’t be suspended.  Do you want headshots like this out of the game or not?

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/09/10 at 12:24 PM ET

I would say the following either way, even though i am a huge Boston fan. The hit was horrible, there are certain things that you just dont do in hockey. I agree that Chara should maybe have given Crosby or even Cooke a good hit and laid them out, just take the roughing or interference call, but not a crosscheck to the back of the head, of course. the fans would have loved it, and the players would have too. I wish Savard a quick recovery, and Its OK that Canada took the gold, cause Boston is bring back the silver cup!!!

Posted by DudeGuyBroGuy from RI on 03/14/10 at 09:11 PM ET