At full speed this looks like the dirtiest hit by any player since Bertuzzi’s last incident.

In slow motion, it just looks like a botched hipcheck with accidental head contact.

No idea if there will be additional discipline.

Posted by steviesteve on 03/28/11 at 08:08 PM ET

Dumbass. How many games will he get?

Posted by pensfan29 on 03/28/11 at 08:10 PM ET

Stupid play, Unfortunately i can see a suspension for this. Bert flew in there without thinking and was probably going for a good hit. Also notice how he spins a bit to hit with his hip?  I think him doing that made him feel awkward and i think his elbow came up to cushion himself on the glass. Or maybe he just wanted to take Johnsons head off… i mean he does have an ugly jersey on.

Posted by Ataris18 from Tucson, AZ on 03/28/11 at 08:10 PM ET

if Bert would have gone straight into Johnson and kept his arms down we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

fine? 1-2 games?

Posted by some kid on 03/28/11 at 08:17 PM ET

At full speed this looks like the dirtiest hit by any player since Bertuzzi’s last incident.

In slow motion, it just looks like a botched hipcheck with accidental head contact.

No idea if there will be additional discipline.

Posted by steviesteve on 03/28/11 at 08:08 PM ET

Agree with just about everything, except the accidental head contact part…. He clearly came up with his elbow…

Posted by Tony from Virginia Beach, VA on 03/28/11 at 08:19 PM ET

Boy, I don’t envy Old Colie the call he has to make on this one.

Watching it again, one angle looks like he’s trying to throw a hipcheck and lines it up wrong (strange location to do that, though; if he misses the guy he’ll go flying into the boards off-balance at a high speed). Another angle makes it look like he’s playing torpedo with his elbows.

No idea what to make of this.

Posted by steviesteve on 03/28/11 at 08:21 PM ET

Even if his arm was down, they probably could have called charging. He came outta nowhere

Posted by pensfan29 on 03/28/11 at 08:22 PM ET

i really dont believe it was intentional by no means, but we have rules for this now and unfortunately its gonna cost. I still dont think it was an elbow, looks more like the area between elbow and shoulder. Meh.

Posted by NIVO on 03/28/11 at 08:22 PM ET

Bad hit. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Come on Bert.
Johnson’s back in the game. We’ll see how the wheel of justice lands on this one.

Posted by MarkK from Maryland on 03/28/11 at 08:24 PM ET

At least Johnson’s OK. I don’t think that Bertuzzi intended to hit Johnson in the head, but when he turned away from the hit, he also left his feet, and you simply cannot do that. I don’t know if he’ll be suspended, but given his reputation, I would imagine he’s going to be talking to Colin Campbell tomorrow morning.

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 03/28/11 at 08:25 PM ET

Agree with just about everything, except the accidental head contact part…. He clearly came up with his elbow…

Posted by Tony from Virginia Beach, VA on 03/28/11 at 08:19 PM ET

I can’t tell. His arm might come up because he’s off balance. Or he’s just trying to kill somebody. One of the two.

Posted by steviesteve on 03/28/11 at 08:25 PM ET

Bert hasn’t hit a guy in like five years.  Obviously his timing is off.  Yeah it was an unintentional elbow to the head but he should have got 2:00 minutes tops.

If he gets anything else it will be a joke.

Seriously Paul?  You got that up quick.  You sit there watching the Wings just waiting for Bertuzzi to do something wrong then you pounce on it.

Posted by WingsFanInBeanLand from Lidstrom's head telling him 1 more year on 03/28/11 at 08:27 PM ET

Stupid, dirty, dangerous play by Bertuzzi.  All he has to do is keep his arms down and it’s a clean hit.  It will be interesting to see the ruling the NHL makes.  Does he fall into the category of repeat offender that doesn’t get it?  Does he fall into the Heatley category?  Does he get nothing?

I imagine he gets 5-8 games.  I can’t say if that’s too much or too little.

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 08:27 PM ET

yeah, but the elbow doesn’t make contact. it’s more a wrapup with the arm or a forearm shiver that was pretty incidental. it also looks worse because johnson’s lid went flying.

Posted by Chet from twitter: thegansen on 03/28/11 at 08:28 PM ET

I don’t know. Slow motion looks more like an armpit check than an elbow, like he’s trying to raise above the head and didn’t pull it off.

Posted by phillyd from New Jersey on 03/28/11 at 08:28 PM ET

I imagine he gets 5-8 games.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you f*cking kidding right?

RIGHT?!?!?

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 08:29 PM ET

You know, I looked at it again and if he keeps his arms in, I think he takes Johnson’s head off with his shoulder, just my thought on that part of it.

Posted by phillyd from New Jersey on 03/28/11 at 08:29 PM ET

Ya i do question if his arm came up on an off balance im going to hit the wall type issue. But yes i could see him getting 1-2 games. It was a dumb thing to do.

Posted by Ataris18 from Tucson, AZ on 03/28/11 at 08:34 PM ET

Both MLive’s Ansar Khan and the Detroit News’s Ted Kulfan think that there will be a suspension or at least some sort of supplementary discipline for Bertuzzi, and the AP describes the hit Classically:

Red Wings’ Bertuzzi ejected for a head shot

DETROIT (AP) - Red Wings forward Todd Bertuzzi has been called for a 5-minute elbowing penalty and a game misconduct against the Chicago Blackhawks.

Bertuzzi hit Blackhawks forward Ryan Johnson in the head 5:17 into Monday night’s game.

Johnson went down to his knees and gloves for a while before slowly getting up. He went off the ice and toward the dressing room, but played later in the first period.

Bertuzzi was ejected for a check that might’ve gone unpunished before the NHL started to crack down on such high hits.

Matt Cooke of the Pittsburgh Penguins was suspended for the last 10 games of the regular season and the first round of the playoffs for elbowing defenseman Ryan McDonagh of the New York Rangers in the head.

I very, very, very genuinely don’t believe that Bertuzzi intended to hurt Johnson—when a 235-lb man wants to hurt you, you’re toast—but he made a hit that is unacceptable by leaving his feet and even as a Wings fan I would say that it’s 50/50 as to whether he’s suspended/fined or simply left to his own devices given that he got 5 and a game.

I don’t want to see hits like this in the game. I don’t think anybody does. The most important thing is that Johnson’s okay.

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 03/28/11 at 08:34 PM ET

It looks like an armpit to the head not an elbow.  Maybe RJ went down due to the stench.  Bert is generally scared to death to hit anyone.  He starts doing so the last couple of games and now he is supposedly dirty again. I used to hate Bert but he is beyond remorseful and is nothing but a gentle giant now.  He even went back to, what looks like, check on RJ.  I would be shocked if he gets more then just getting tossed from this game.

Posted by blah on 03/28/11 at 08:35 PM ET

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 08:29 PM ET

Take off your red and white glasses and tell me how he doesn’t get that many.  He’s a repeat offender.  He made the choice to hit with the elbow instead of keeping his arms down.  The league is attempting to do something, anything about head shots.  Granted, who the hell knows Campbell would do.  Considering Heatley threw an elbow, got two games, and had no history prior to that, would 5 games be really a stretch of the imagination?

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 08:39 PM ET

Good thing Johnson was OK. Let’s hope he STAYS ok, which hopefully has been made certain by the new concussion-protocol measures.

Posted by Mr. Fnytelhatt on 03/28/11 at 08:42 PM ET

Repeat offender probation is embarrassingly short. It’s like fourteen months or something.

Whatever it is, Bertuzzi’s formally clear of that tag for a long time now.

Whether it gets factored in behind closed doors, who knows.

Posted by steviesteve on 03/28/11 at 08:45 PM ET

Bert deserves nothing more if for no other reason than http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-SMjhK0YMU .  Keith didn’t even get a penalty on this hit.  35 sec mark for best look.

Posted by Valek on 03/28/11 at 08:50 PM ET

Take off your red and white glasses and tell me how he doesn’t get that many. 

He’s not a repeat offender.  He barely even hits anymore.  The league has not suspended guys who have been suspended in the last 18 months, and they’re going to suspend someone who’s been scared to hit for the last handful of years?

Take off your anti-Bertuzzi glasses and explain how he gets more than one or two?  There have been WAY worse hits this year that have gotten 1-2 games, yet somehow this deserves more than a half dozen?

Out of your MIND.

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 08:53 PM ET

Bob McKenzie tweet,

For those asking about Bertuzzi hit: I suspect he will walk with time served (5 and GM). Similar to Hornqvist on Seguin. Hornqvist fined.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 03/28/11 at 08:55 PM ET

Posted by Valek on 03/28/11 at 08:50 PM ET

Then by that token, Cooke and Heatley shouldn’t have gotten anything for their elbows as well.  Just because there was no call on that play doesn’t mean that letting Bertuzzi or any other player off is the right call.

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 08:56 PM ET

I think it’s 50/50 as to whether the league will do anything because the right call was made—he got 5 and a game, and let’s be honest here, the injury always plays a role in what happens when an incident gets to Colin Campbell’s desk (it WILL be reviewed), and Johnson was thankfully not hurt.

We’ll see what happens. I’m a Wings fan so I hope Bert doesn’t get suspended, but if he’s fined I wouldn’t have a problem with it, and if he’s suspended, he’s suspended. The hit may have been unintentional but it’s obviously unacceptable.

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 03/28/11 at 09:00 PM ET

Then by that token, Cooke and Heatley shouldn’t have gotten anything for their elbows as well.  Just because there was no call on that play doesn’t mean that letting Bertuzzi or any other player off is the right call.

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 08:56 PM ET

My point was that if they didn’t think Keith’s elbow, which was worse than Bert’s was worthy of a suspension or a fine, I don’t see how Bert deserves anything extra considering he pretty much just got a game suspension by being kicked out early in the first period.

Posted by Valek on 03/28/11 at 09:03 PM ET

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 08:53 PM ET

It has nothing to do with Bertuzzi.  You don’t think the GM meeting that was just held where head shots were the main topic will be discussed?  Is this the type of hit you want to see all the time?  I guess the ‘he’s been scared to hit since the incident’ for Bertuzzi, will be like people who say, well, Cooke’s dirty but he can play an effective role.  It doesn’t that it was a dirty, dangerous, stupid play that could have easily been avoided. 

Jarrko Ruutu hasn’t been suspended in over two years.  If he makes this hit instead of Bertuzzi, what’s your reaction?

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 09:05 PM ET

I guess the ‘he’s been scared to hit since the incident’ for Bertuzzi, will be like people who say, well, Cooke’s dirty but he can play an effective role.

Except that in this case it’s true.  Cooke is consistently dirty.  You Pens fans can talk all you want about Bylsma and Shero “talking to” Cooke, yet he continues to take dangerous runs at people.  Bertuzzi has a reputation, of course, but he hasn’t been in any kind of trouble in a long time and he TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF to CHANGE the way he plays.  As a Red Wings fan, watching through my red and white tinted glasses, I’m often frustrated that, for a guy his size, he’s not physical enough.

Jarrko Ruutu hasn’t been suspended in over two years.  If he makes this hit instead of Bertuzzi, what’s your reaction?

I’d probably say what I’m saying now, which is that he essentially already got a game suspension and there was no injury and there was clearly no intent to injure.

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 09:12 PM ET

Bertuzzi isn’t technically a “repeat offender” for purposes of supplementary discipline, but there’s an increased push to actually punish headshots after the GM meeting and Bertuzzi’s name is poison when it comes to dangerous play.  I think this could be a two game like Heatley’s (even though I think Heatley’s act looked more malicious to me).

Anywhere in 0-4 games won’t surprise me at all.  More than that would draw some big attention.

Posted by HitokiriEric from Ann Arbor, MI on 03/28/11 at 09:14 PM ET

Anywhere in 0-4 games won’t surprise me at all.

I don’t think it’s deserved, but I wouldn’t be surprised by 1-2 games, and I wouldn’t really complain about it.  I think anything more is overboard.

That said, I agree with McKenzie, if only because the hit happened so early in the game that he’s essentially been suspended for a game already.

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 09:17 PM ET

Posted by Valek on 03/28/11 at 09:03 PM ET

I agree completely with your reasoning, however, we all know the NHL is anything but consistent in its rulings.  The Heatley elbow was more vicious than the Cooke elbow based on the result, and they got the right call on Cooke based on his past history and such.  Not so much on Heatley in my opinion.  It’s a crap shoot and that more than anything needs to change.  It will be interesting to see how the league rules.  Also, how much does media reaction play into the rulings?

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 09:20 PM ET

No intent there at all… but stupid, STUPID play by Bertuzzi, in a night where he made more than a couple before being sent off.

And no, it wasn’t an elbow.  It was more his arm, loosely.  But dumb, dumb, dumb… no reason for Bert to have his arm up there in the first place.

Quite frankly, removing Bert from the game may have hurt CHI more than DET, as Bert was a turnover machine (and not in the good way) the first 5 min.  And Bert has been out of control the last few games.  Not in the “dangerous” sense but in the “Oh God, what is he doing?” sense.

But hey whatever…. throw 3 or 4 games at him even.  I truly don’t care, as a Wings fan.  We expect better of our players.

Posted by Primis on 03/28/11 at 09:22 PM ET

I agree completely with your reasoning, however, we all know the NHL is anything but consistent in its rulings.  The Heatley elbow was more vicious than the Cooke elbow based on the result, and they got the right call on Cooke based on his past history and such.  Not so much on Heatley in my opinion.  It’s a crap shoot and that more than anything needs to change.  It will be interesting to see how the league rules.  Also, how much does media reaction play into the rulings?

Posted by pens fan in baltimore on 03/28/11 at 09:20 PM ET

Very true on the consistency, and my comments are more on point to how I think it should go.  It certainly wouldn’t surprise me if Bert got suspended if for no other reason than the only thing consistent about Campbell’s disciplinary rulings is their inconsitencies.

Posted by Valek on 03/28/11 at 09:25 PM ET

I don’t think that Bertuzzi will get anything other than time served.

Posted by goon from Grand Forks, ND on 03/28/11 at 09:32 PM ET

Somebody’s gotta say it—despite his ups and downs, there are Wings fans who like Bertuzzi and what he brings to the team both offensively and especially defensively (as strange as that sounds), myself included, so it’s not as if everybody holds him in contempt or something.

This was a stupid, needless and dangerous hit made by a player who’s reinvented himself and I would like to think that it no longer reflects his new-found maturity. We certainly don’t forget the past, but he’s no longer just a monster who did a horrific thing anymore. He’s a human being who’s grown up the hard way.

I get the feeling that 5 and a game and possibly a fine will send the message necessary in the NHL’s eyes, but obviously if he was to be suspended, I wouldn’t object to it because no one wants to see a player leave his feet and make contact with a player’s head, regardless of whether it’s from the blind side or straight on.

These hits have no place in the game—and it doesn’t matter whether they’re intentional or unintentional. I’m glad that the league’s getting toward a place where hits whose products are significant contact with a player’s head are no longer “part of the game.”

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 03/28/11 at 09:40 PM ET

Here’s the problem with the Bertuzzi hit: it’s outcome was far worse than the apparent intent.  If he wasn’t just bad at checking, it’s nothing more than a hard hit in the corner.  But he’s bad at checking, so he half misses the guy and in throwing out his arm to catch himself as he glances off and past, he bashes the player in the head.  That glancing passing elbow did 90% of the damage since his hip check largely missed.

This is the problem with the NHL.  People are not taught how to properly hit, and they are certainly not taught how to properly accept hits by being aware of their approach.

So you get behemoths like Bert occasionally flailing away like a gigantic 9 year old on a sugar rush, or players keeping their heads down as though they are playing in a broomball league and getting absolutely obliterated because of it, or guys lining up the head from 8 strides away… and the NHL has to rule equally against all of those origins of bad outcomes, which doesn’t really address any of the fundamental problems.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 03/28/11 at 10:13 PM ET

I wouldn’t mind seeing the NHL quite literally force its coaches and players to go through a video or three re-teaching them how to hit properly. It’s about separating a player from the puck, not trying to create maximum havoc.

Eddie Olczyk’s, “You need to keep your damn stick down because once your stick is high, your elbows get high, and your shoulders are up, and bad things happen” axiom seems very appropriate in this instance.

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 03/28/11 at 10:19 PM ET

Here’s the problem with the Bertuzzi hit: it’s outcome was far worse than the apparent intent.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 03/28/11 at 10:13 PM ET

It really wasn’t.  Johnson came back to play not that much later.  Its outcome was rather tame and uninteresting, quite frankly, compared to guys who have missed or are missing entire seasons.

Johnson didn’t even miss a period.

Posted by Primis on 03/28/11 at 10:22 PM ET

All he has to do is keep his arms down and it’s a clean hit.

I’m curious, are you one of those rare human beings who is able to maintain his balance on ice skates while flying around backward, WITHOUT using your arms?

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 03/28/11 at 10:31 PM ET

I’m curious, are you one of those rare human beings who is able to maintain his balance on ice skates while flying around backward, WITHOUT using your arms?

Isn’t every defenseman -and hopefully every forward, if they’re playing at the NHL level- able to skate backwards without flailing about?

Posted by Garth on 03/28/11 at 10:45 PM ET

Isn’t every defenseman -and hopefully every forward, if they’re playing at the NHL level- able to skate backwards without flailing about?

D, yes. Forwards? Maybe not at that speed in traffic.

Strange thing about this hit is, if it was supposed to be a hipcheck, why is Bertuzzi trying to hipcheck a guy backwards at this speed this close to the boards? If the Blackhawk sidesteps him or ducks, Bertuzzi almost certainly injures himself on this play. It doesn’t make sense that he would throw this hit in this situation.

Neither does the alternative, though, which is that a 35 year old pro, unprovoked, decided to try to end some minor-leaguer who was minding his own business.

Maybe Bertuzzi’s just a clod.

Posted by steviesteve on 03/28/11 at 11:14 PM ET

I have to say that I’m very proud to come into this thread 44 comments in and nobody’s screaming about how he should have never been let back in the league in the first place.

Pretty good conversation so far.

Bert probably does hurt Johnson more if he keeps that arm down, but that’s not the issue.  He shouldn’t have been in that position in the first place.  I don’t think it was an elbow, but rather a weird half-clothesline-armpit hit, but it was definitely charging and definitely worth 5 and a game.

Stupid play by Bertuzzi. 

Looking at fairly recent comparables:

Dany Heatley: intentional elbow to the head, definite intent to injure - 2 games.

Brad Marchand: intentional blind-side elbow to the back of the head, definitely dirty - 2 games.

Matt cooke: Intentional elbow to the chin, dirty play - 14-17 games.

Patric Hornqvist: Hard play ending with a stupid check where head contact was made with the elbow - 0 games, $2,500 fine.

Martin Erat: Comes off the bench, misses a check, but catches a guy with the elbow, dirty play - 0 games, $0 fine.

If anything, I’d say Hornqvist’s elbow is the best comparison.

To be fair, I thought Hornqvist should have been suspended for that hit.  I wouldn’t be surprised or dismayed if Bertuzzi were to get suspended.  I don’t think it will be much if anything though.  Probably closer to the 1-2 range than 5-8.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/28/11 at 11:42 PM ET

Time served. Keep your head up, Johnson. Could’ve been worse if it was the Bert who used to be a tad faster.

Posted by Jesters Dead on 03/28/11 at 11:43 PM ET

Time served. Keep your head up, Johnson.

Agreed, Bert was coming in full steam ahead, it didn’t look intentional to me, but I would not be surprised if he gets a game or two.
Rule of thumb: When Bert is heading towards you, brace yourself.

Posted by PuckHound61 from Speckville USA on 03/29/11 at 12:13 AM ET

At the Max…Bert should just be fined for stupidity….
He was way too late to the party and decided to cover his ass with a body check that looked like my daughter in her first peewee game..
He should have just used his momentum to follow the puck and avoided contact completely.
A total bonehead move by a guy moving at 30 mph, but thinking at 15 mph.

Primis is right….Tuzzi’s game has just turned to pigeon poop.
CHI had to play a much better game with someone competent filling his ice time.

Posted by HockeyTownTodd on 03/29/11 at 12:17 AM ET

First off, it wasn’t an elbow in the classic sense, as his arm wasn’ bent in a chicken wing (Matt Cooke).  His arm was straight, so at worst a forearm shiver.  Second, as has been mentioned, he’s NOT a repeat offender, I believe the statute of limitations on that is 18 months.  I’m thinking he probably gets fined, as hits tha don’t lead to injury that happen early in the game resulting in ejections usually end up with time served and that’s it.  He might get a game, but anything more than that and it’s clear that the NHL is punishing him for what happened with Steve Moore, which shouldn’t come into play here.

Posted by John W. from a bubble wrap cocoon on 03/29/11 at 01:03 AM ET

So to all the Red Wings fans who think this hit doesn’t warrant a suspension, I guess if Jarrku Ruutu hits Zetteberg like this its totally ok and he deserves nothing more than the 5 minute major and a game? 

Please, you’d be screaming bloody murder.  If somebody hit Crosby like that I know I’d be screaming.  I’m a Pens fan and wish the likes of Matt Cooke and Todd Bertuzzi were thrown out of the league permanently.  Bertuzzi is a freaking thug just like Cooke.  And yes, when you break someone’s neck on the dirties play since McSorley, there should be no statute of limitations on your repeat offender status.  The game could live without players like this forever.  The NHL allows its teams to keep guys like this around because they have some skills other than goonism due to a lack of any consequential discipline for this type of garbage.  I hope to heck the Pens dump Cooke in the off-season.  They can’t do anything at this point, but I’ll be surprised & sickened if he’s on the roster next year.  The NHL could start by taking away a roster spot for those games, or fining the team when a player got suspended.

If the league would ever man up and suspend a star, (Ovechkin, Chara, Heatley come to mind) for a meaningful amount of time they’d be on to something.  Or create a rule that says any intent to injure head shot gets a mandatory suspension of X games for the first offense, x more for the next, etc, some sort of standardization, it’d help too.  Also, the fact that a player was or wasn’t injured shouldn’t matter very much, or not at all.  I understand the penalty for attempted murder is still pretty severe, not so in the NHL. 

I think the game can be plenty physical without all these dirty hits.  Just look at how exciting the recent Olympic hockey was.  There was plenty of hitting, I seem to recall Jagr getting absolutely buried on a beautiful clean hit.  I didn’t mind, it was well executed, and I hate Ovechkin, and I’m a Jagr fan.  I want to see the Crosby’s and Zetteberg’s Malkin’s & Datsyuk’s of the world playing a gritty skill game in the NHL, similar to the olympics.  The two finals with Detroit & Pittsburgh were riveting hockey series to watch.  If Orpik or Kronwall cross the line with their aggressive play, then I’m for suspending them too.  I’ve got no problem with big clean hits.  but go into someone from behind, or jump up to hit someone high and you should get the gate, period. 

I suppose fighting is fine during the regular season when its man on man without sucker punches etc. if it helps sell tickets.  But its funny how there aren’t any fights in the playoffs.  I happen to like the fighting during the regular season, to spice up a game or wake a team up, I don’t even care if its “pre-arranged” as long as the guys square up.  There are a lot of regular season games and I feel it adds some entertainment, but that’s just me.  I don’t happen to buy the argument that the fighters help “police” the league when there’s a questionable hit.  From what I see they tend to just fight other fighters and rarely go after a guy later that made a dirty play.  That’s usually handled by someone else on the ice immediately, and the fighters play so infrequently that there seldom on the ice at that moment. 

Either way, I could live without it, and I think the middleweights who can actually play could still fight if need be.  With actual consequences that hurt players and teams for garbage thuggery, I can’t see how the players union, or the league could argue against it.  Have a panel with a couple lady Byng type players, two quality retired officials, and a respected non-partisan (judge or something) board to review and rule on dirty play.  One things for certain, to grow the game please get rid of the outright dirty plays and Colin Campbell forever.

Posted by Pete from Pittsburgh PA on 03/29/11 at 01:20 AM ET

A really dangerous hit but I think at the worst, he’ll get two games in addition to the game misconduct.

Posted by SYF from the bottom of my, what, 11teenth pint of Guinness? on 03/29/11 at 02:27 AM ET

Definitely the right call on the ice. I think this is one of those plays where there wasn’t an intent to hurt him or even hit him high, but the responsibility is on Bertuzzi (or in general, the hitter) to make sure that if he’s coming in fast for the hit that he’s going to be able to square up cleanly, and if not, you have to bail on it and ease up.

Because of his history, Bertuzzi will be suspended. If this were anyone else, I’d say the call on the ice, plus a fine, and a game would be sufficient. But Bertuzzi has done what he’s done, so five games isn’t unreasonable.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 03/29/11 at 08:47 AM ET

I guess if Jarrku Ruutu hits Zetteberg like this its totally ok and he deserves nothing more than the 5 minute major and a game?

Yes.  If it is the exact same hit, yes.

Posted by Garth on 03/29/11 at 08:58 AM ET

Bertuzzi is a freaking thug just like Cooke.

No he’s not.  If you think that, you should try watching him play.

Say what you will about Bert on Moore, but you cant’ compare Bert to Cooke.  At all.  Bert’s game is completely different from Cooke’s and if you can’t see that, then there’s no helping you.

But Bertuzzi has done what he’s done, so five games isn’t unreasonable.

I’ve quite unreasonable.  There was clearly no intent to injure.  The head was not targeted.  There was no injury.

Add to this the fact that worse hits have gotten nothing and yes, 5 games is absolutely unreasonable, I don’t care what happened 7 years ago.

Posted by Garth on 03/29/11 at 09:03 AM ET

Someone who’s been in the league as long as he has, and lives with the reputation that he owns, should know to control his play better. I frankly don’t care what he did or did not intend to do. Players need to take responsibility for their actions, intended or not intended.

Posted by VAHockeyFan on 03/29/11 at 09:36 AM ET

Players need to take responsibility for their actions

Like visiting the opposing team’s locker room to apologize for the hit?  Because Bertuzzi did that.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 09:41 AM ET

JJ: So if I get drunk and hit you with my car, but come by your house and say I’m sorry, then it’s OK? Just like someone should be responsible for what they do with their car, hockey players need to be responsible for what they do with their bodies. I’m not saying that it wasn’t a good thing that Bertuzzi came to say he was sorry for what happened, but would you have the same forgiving feeling if Matt Cooke said he was sorry for what he did? Still the same lack of control on the ice. Penalty for it should be the same, regardless of intent or how sorry you feel about it afterward.

Posted by VAHockeyFan on 03/29/11 at 10:05 AM ET

He’s not a repeat offender

Hahahaha.  That’s my favorite right there.

He’s changed his game!

He’s AFRAID to hit people, now!

He’s soooooo sorry!

I’m glad nobody is making excuses for the guy that gave the NHL it’s blackest eye.  Once a dirty player, always a dirty player, right guys?

Suspend him for the rest of the regular season just as a refresher.  We don’t want him forgetting how to be a “gentle giant”, you know?

Say what you will about Bert on Moore, but you cant’ compare Bert to Cooke.  At all.  Bert’s game is completely different from Cooke’s and if you can’t see that, then there’s no helping you.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Just like you can’t compare Cooke to that piece of garbage player on Long Island, right?  Because Cooke’s game is completely different from that guy’s…but that argument wasn’t an option for Pens fans, was it? 

Because a dirty play is a dirty play and a dirty player is a dirty player, right?

And it doesn’t matter what a guy does for his team, it doesn’t make a dirty deed any less dirty.  At least that’s what I learned from all the non-Penguins fans about Matt Cooke.

I love when hypocrisy rears its ugly head.

Posted by Flashtastick56 from Milford, CT on 03/29/11 at 10:08 AM ET

JJ: So if I get drunk and hit you with my car, but come by your house and say I’m sorry, then it’s OK?

It sure as hell makes it better, especially if you’re punished for it, which you’re forgetting that Bertuzzi was.

That penalty happened in the first five minutes of a game and saw Bertuzzi given a game misconduct for his actions.  It’s not like he got off scott-free.

would you have the same forgiving feeling if Matt Cooke said he was sorry for what he did?

Actually, yes, I believe I would.  Kind of like I had the same forgiving feeling when Brent Burns showed absolute contrition for accidentally butt-ending a guy in the face earlier in this season.  Remorse goes a long way with me.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Just like you can’t compare Cooke to that piece of garbage player on Long Island, right?  Because Cooke’s game is completely different from that guy’s…but that argument wasn’t an option for Pens fans, was it? 

Did somebody really say that you can’t compare Cooke to Gillies?

I love when hypocrisy rears its ugly head.

Then you must have really high self-esteem after that tirade.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 10:20 AM ET

Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Just like you can’t compare Cooke to that piece of garbage player on Long Island, right?  Because Cooke’s game is completely different from that guy’s…but that argument wasn’t an option for Pens fans, was it? 

Did somebody really say that you can’t compare Cooke to Gillies?

I love when hypocrisy rears its ugly head.

Then you must have really high self-esteem after that tirade.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 10:20 AM ET

Not right then, obviously.  But when everything happened a couple of weeks ago, absolutely.  Go find them.

And I have nothing against you, JJ.  You do nothing but present fair, well thought out arguments.  I have no reason to call you a hypocrite nor do I see ever having any reason.  But if you remember correctly, I said that if/when it happened to another player/team, the fans of that team/player would come out of the woodwork to do the very same thing Penguin fans were chastised for doing during the whole Matt Cooke thing - finding reasons to defend that player.

And here we are.  The fact that it was Bertuzzi - who I used in my tirade as an example - makes me giddy.  I just love being right.

Posted by Flashtastick56 from Milford, CT on 03/29/11 at 10:28 AM ET

And here we are.  The fact that it was Bertuzzi - who I used in my tirade as an example - makes me giddy.  I just love being right.

Posted by Flashtastick56 from Milford, CT on 03/29/11 at 10:28 AM ET

Ah, I apologize.  I had lost the context there.

I mean, it’s a good point that people are going to come out to defend their own player.  That’s always going to happen.  I’m pretty sure that Sean Avery could pull an uzi the middle of the game and you’d find at least one Rangers fan online saying he was pushed.

But, trying as hard as I am to take off the red-colored glasses in this case, I’m finding trouble saying that this is evidence that Bertuzzi has been lying in wait all this time for the perfect opportunity to show how dirty he is again.

For what it’s worth, I’m pretty happy with the way Penguins fans have reacted to the last Matt Cooke suspension.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 10:48 AM ET

I’m glad nobody is making excuses for the guy that gave the NHL it’s blackest eye.  Once a dirty player, always a dirty player, right guys?

no, not even close.

how can you not see the difference between a player (Bertuzzi) who had ONE incident YEARS ago and NOTHING SINCE, and a player who has had MULTIPLE INCIDENTS in the PAST FEW SEASONS?

seriously.  get a grip on reality.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 03/29/11 at 10:56 AM ET

My point in this whole thing is that, in my opinion, the player’s intent and his past should not have a bearing on his punishment. If he was reckless or negligent on the ice, he should be suspended. Period. Don’t care how sorry he is, don’t care if he does/doesn’t have a past. If you don’t nip it in the bud every time, you leave way to much for subjective decisions to be made….and Colin Campbell is the last person I would want making a “subjective” decision.

Posted by VAHockeyFan on 03/29/11 at 11:04 AM ET

and Colin Campbell is the last person I would want making a “subjective” decision.

You and I agree on that point, but disagree that the solution to it is to try to take all subjectivity out of the process.

I propose that we remove Colin Campbell from the process and let things like intent still make a difference.

I believe this is a way to help eliminate the seriously dirty and dangerous plays without taking all hitting out of the game.  I would not want Bertuzzi to get the same punishment here as Trevor Gillies got for what he did in that Penguins bloodbath game because you can clearly see the difference in intent between the two plays.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 11:07 AM ET

My point in this whole thing is that, in my opinion, the player’s intent and his past should not have a bearing on his punishment. If he was reckless or negligent on the ice, he should be suspended. Period. Don’t care how sorry he is, don’t care if he does/doesn’t have a past. If you don’t nip it in the bud every time, you leave way to much for subjective decisions to be made….and Colin Campbell is the last person I would want making a “subjective” decision.

I agree with this.  it gives the impression that if you don’t have a history, you will get less punishment, and therefore you have more leeway to play a risky and/or dangerous style.

if you went into court and told the judge “hey, it’s my first murder…go easy on me” how long would it take the judge to stop laughing?

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 03/29/11 at 11:33 AM ET

if you went into court and told the judge “hey, it’s my first murder…go easy on me” how long would it take the judge to stop laughing?

Probably no time flat, as defense attorneys will always use a clean rap sheet to try to get a lighter sentencing.

This is the way the justice system works.  Intent and history are factors in things.  If we threw everybody away who had ever lost his cool in a bar for the same amount of time that we gave to the sick idiots who plan to beat up minorities, then the system wouldn’t work.

What we’re talking about here is locking everybody away for murder, even in cases when it’s manslaughter.  After all, the primary difference between those two crimes is intent.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 11:42 AM ET

seriously.  get a grip on reality.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 03/29/11 at 10:56 AM ET

Again.  Excuses.

A dirty play is a dirty play.  A dirty player is a dirty player.  From what I’ve gathered in the comments section of Matt Cooke posts around here, there’s no wiggle room to that fact. 

Todd Bertuzzi engaged in a stupid, reckless and dirty hit last night.  It doesn’t matter what kind of player he is or what sort of impact he has on the team he plays for - those things aren’t an excuse for what he did last night (or what he’s done in the past).  At least that’s what everyone said about Matt Cooke.

Can’t have it one way for Cooke and another for Bertuzzi just because one is a Penguins and the other a Wing.

Look, I don’t keep a running tally on who says what around here…I just know that these sorts of arguments weren’t acceptable for Penguins fans when they were talking of Matt Cooke last week.  So, to me, they aren’t acceptable for any other fanbase, either because that would be extremely hypocritical.  That’s all.

But, trying as hard as I am to take off the red-colored glasses in this case, I’m finding trouble saying that this is evidence that Bertuzzi has been lying in wait all this time for the perfect opportunity to show how dirty he is again.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/29/11 at 10:48 AM ET

I understand that.  This was more tongue-in-cheek than anything.  He’s a completely different player than what he was 7 years ago.  You can tell that not only by what he does on the ice but the production as well.  I think people forget he was a top-5 scorer in the two years prior to that infamous February evening (I know I do sometimes).  Afterwards, not so much.  He contributes, but not @ a PPG pace like he did.

Posted by Flashtastick56 from Milford, CT on 03/29/11 at 02:01 PM ET

I can’t see everything perfectly on this replay…but I think Bertuzzi was looking to lay a hit on Johnson…he was coming pretty straight on…I think Johnson hears his teammmates warning and gets a little lower to protect himself…I think it was a good hockey play where sometimes at such high speeds things can and do go wrong . I am glad Johnson is OK and I am glad Bertuzzi is still in the game . oNe more thing…Let’s Go Pens !

Posted by svenlovesflo from Pittsburgh on 03/29/11 at 03:07 PM ET