Conflict of Interest?
Last week, Jamie Benn of the Dallas Stars was ejected for his high impact hit that threw Arizona Coyotes defenseman Oliver Ekman-Larsson into the board. It was a dangerous blow delivered with the first point of contact being Ekman-Larsson’s back.
Because Benn was penalized with a game misconduct on the play, many expected him to be handed a suspension. Once again, inconsistency reared its ugly head as Benn has appeared to have avoided any further discipline.
The lack of fine or suspension for Benn doesn’t make sense. At least it didn’t until fans pointed out Parros might have good reason to let the left-winger off the hook. Two years ago, Violent Gentlemen posted an image of Benn. On it, he is praised as a “pure legend”.
Jamie Benn, pure legend. Thanks @shatteredlenstx !! #vghc #violentgentlemen
Posted by Violent Gentlemen on Wednesday, July 11, 2018
It’s not a coincidence that Parros’s company posted the photo of the player wearing one of their hats across its social media platforms. However, it may be a coincidence that Benn avoided discipline after appearing to model for the brand.
The problem is that the optics are terrible. Even if Parros didn’t consider his connection with Benn at all, there’s still a conflict of interest.
‘Conflict of interest’ really is the key term here. There are too many potential biases in Parros’s background to allow onlookers to believe that he’s always impartial. As previously noted, in his playing days, Parros was a fighter. Certainly, there could be lingering resentment from that time.
Evidence of this are the rivalries Parros developed on the ice. He clearly held grudges as he often fought the same players. While this was his and his fellow combatants’ role, his top three rivals slugged it out many times. He squared up with Darcy Hordichuk 11 times, Jody Shelley eight times, and Colton Orr seven times. If he could hold a grudge then, perhaps he still does.
It would be hard for Parros to remain impartial in his current role when judging the actions of these three players. Luckily they’ve all retired along with nearly all of his other combatant opponents.
The problem, however, isn’t with the individual players, but the teams. 17 of Parros’s fights took place with members of the Sharks. This was not just the most scraps he had against an organization, but nearly 59% more than the next closest team, the St. Louis Blues. He fought with their players ten times. That adds a new layer to Sharks left-winger, Kane’s suspension.
Once again, It’s likely just a coincidence with poor optics but it doesn’t make sense why the NHL allows for the possibility for criticism. Things would be a lot simpler for them if the head of the Department of Player Safety wasn’t a former player.
Parros and the NHL should be looking at ways to improve this department. In the meantime, they need to provide a statement on their reasoning not to suspend Benn. It would go a long way to help restore some trust in Parros. Although, at this point, any attempt to improve his image may be futile.
The league would be best served to take Kane’s suggestion and contract a third party to make all disciplinary decisions. That consideration should be discussed at the upcoming GM meetings.
The onus is now on the NHL to calm their fans and players alike. There’s no way to know what will happen with Parros in the future but it would behoove the NHL to take some kind of action very soon.