Note: You can follows the Penguins on the Penguins Plus blog at PG-Plus. Membership in that site is only $3.99 per month or $36 per year.

Q: What is your opinion of Mike Richards' hit to David Booth? On the replay, he appears to come from behind only at the last second to get directly on the side (of Booth before hitting him). People always make the argument that the player's head was down, but Booth does not appear that way to me. Do they need to have their head on a swivel now?

Mike, Colorado Springs, Colo.

MOLINARI: Richards' ferocious hit on Booth last Saturday, which resulted in Booth being removed from the ice on a stretcher and spending a night in the hospital, does not appear to be illegal, which presumably is why Richards was not suspended for it.

Whether it was a cheap shot and utterly unnecessary is another matter.

Richards was well within his rights to hit Booth, who had just carried the puck across the Philadelphia blue line, and the circumstances were perfect for him to throw a really punishing check. What Richards didn't have to do was to drive his shoulder into Booth's head; he could have laid Booth out simply by putting that shoulder into Booth's side or chest.

Of course, the entire issue would be moot if the NHL, which professes to be so concerned about concussions and other such injuries, would simply legislate against any and all blows to the head, be they inadvertent, intentional or whatever.

That would have made some pretty spectacular checks illegal -- including the one Darius Kasparaitis laid on Eric Lindros that still is celebrated in these parts -- but that seems like a reasonable tradeoff for helping players avoid injuries that could have an impact not only on their careers, but on their lives after hockey.

The fact that former Flyers captain Keith Primeau, whose ties to his former team remain strong, publicly skewered Richards' check during an interview with a Toronto radio station Tuesday -- Primeau said, among other things, that "there is not a place in the game for those kind of hits" and described Richards' check as "a punishable act" -- is a pretty powerful statement on the subject. Primeau, of course, was forced to retire prematurely because of multiple concussions.

Q: Is the reason the Penguins have settled into the current black-and-beige (washed-out gold) colors, rather than the Pirates/Steelers style black-and-yellow (gold), because of the Boston Bruins? I seem to remember that the Bruins resisted the Penguins' (adoption of) black and gold when they first wanted to make that move; claiming that they had the colors first.

Bill Shadish, Downingtown, Pa.

MOLINARI: Boston did, in fact, protest when the Penguins switched from blue-and-white to black-and-gold, but that was in 1980, when the Penguins were trying to piggyback on the success of the Pirates and Steelers, both of whom were world champions at the time. The NHL rejected the Bruins' argument that they were the only team associated with black and gold, noting that the NHL Pirates had worn those colors in the 1920s.

In any case, Boston's complaints had nothing to do with the Penguins' decision to switch to their current colors earlier this decade. (And while some might consider "washed-out gold" to be an accurate description of the shade now found on the Penguins' uniforms, its official name is "Las Vegas Gold.")

Penguins Plus, a blog by Dave Molinari and Shelly Anderson, is featured exclusively on PG+, a members-only web site from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.