Former mustachioed enforcer George Parros, the NHL’s senior vice president of the Department of Player Safety since 2017, is under fire after the league doled out another controversial suspension.
Anaheim Ducks defenseman Radko Gudas received just a five-game ban from Player Safety after appearing to intentionally knee Auston Matthews. The hit ended the season of one of the NHL’s biggest stars due to a Grade 3 MCL tear and quad contusion, and came shortly after Gudas injured Sidney Crosby at the Olympics on a similar play.
Matthews’s agent, Judd Moldaver, went the extraordinary step of releasing a statement following the ruling. Part of what made Matthews’ representative, and the Leafs fanbase at large, so frustrated was that Player Safety would not even hold an in-person hearing, which would have allowed the league to suspend Gudas, a repeat offender who had been suspended four times prior, more than five games.
Moldaver wrote:
In light of the obvious severity of the play, I am disappointed and shocked the league would allow such a ruling. A phone hearing and 5 games is laughable and preposterous.
While the process is set in our CBA, that this was the discipline is reckless and ridiculous.
This decision results in a further loss of confidence in the disciplinary process for all players.
Players and fans deserve better. The Player Safety Department should be suspended.
Connor McDavid, who usually avoids speaking out on major issues (and got away with a dangerous play of his own earlier in the season), even suggested the NHL should rethink the Player Safety process as a whole — in his own both-sidesy way.
“I think player safety has done their best,” McDavid said on Sunday. “It’s not an easy thing to do. With that being said, I think there is reason to take a look at how the whole process works.
“If every time there’s a suspension, everybody complains about it, why don’t we take a look at the process and figure out if there’s a better way to make sure both parties are happy? It seems like there’s a lot of frustration there.”
With all of that context, Parros spoke to the media on Tuesday morning from the general manager meetings in Florida to defend Player Safety, believing, from his position, that the department is making sound decisions based on prior history.
“We have a process in place that we feel confident in,” Parros said per TSN. “We’ve been doing it for a long time. You know, we sweat over these decisions and pore over these decisions every night, all season long. We have a process in place that’s consistent. And we have a team that works for me and together with me that evaluates all these plays, a very experienced team, a veteran team, guys that have been here since the beginning of the department, not to mention all the former players that have a large set of experiences of playing the NHL games, accolades, some of the best guys that have played the game, work for this department, help make these decisions. So our process, I feel very confident in. We’ve got great guys who make these decisions, and I think the players should be confident in this team to do so.”
Leafs analyst Steve Dangle tried to articulate Player Safety’s inconsistency by pointing out that Jason Spezza got a six-game suspension during the NHL’s coronavirus-shortened 2020-21 season (which would be the equivalent of an eight or nine-game suspension in an 82-game suspension) for kneeing Neal Pionk — despite the circumstances being much more favorable to the former Leaf.
Spezza had never been suspended before, while Gudas has a long history of dirtiness, and his hit ended Matthews’ season, the Leafs’ best player.
Regarding the Gudas suspension, Parros spoke broadly about the department’s process, again saluting their decision-making.
“I feel confident in this decision,” he said. “We came to it for good reason. When we evaluate these plays, we look at the play, not the players. And then we look at if we determine that play was worthy of supplemental discipline. We then look at the history of the players involved and if there’s an injury or not. This is how we come to make all of our decisions. We did this and made this decision under those circumstances, felt that this was the appropriate response, and so I stand by it.
“So there was the general understanding there was an injury on this play,” he added later. “It seemed very obvious, and I do get an injury report at the time when I decide to have a hearing. After that point in time, I call the team and let them know we’re going to have a hearing for the play, the offending party. Then I’ll find out what the injury information might be. So the assumption was that there was an injury on this play. And having that information and feeling that way about this, knowing that there was likely an injury, I still decided to have just a phone hearing for that. So, you know, it wasn’t like I decided to have a phone hearing, found out there was an injury, and then wished I had it in person instead, if that’s what you’re asking.”
As for Moldaver’s viral criticism, Parros claimed he was unmoved despite having a rare press conference days later. “Listen, is anybody surprised that an agent’s going to stand up for his player? I’m not,” he said. “There’s nasty stuff that gets said out there in the social media world, but that’s not my concern.”
Parros went on to say that Player Safety does not make more conservative rulings due to the possibility of a suspended player challenging the ruling. “It’s a good question. But no, I don’t make decisions based on the threat of appeal or the fear of an appeal.” He added that he still loved the name and branding of his department. “Absolutely. I mean, listen, we uphold the rule book and how it’s enforced. Those rules are written and how they’re enforced on the ice. And the biggest part of that is ensuring these rules create a safe environment for these players to play the game.”
