Parros shows his bias by suspending Matthews and not even reviewing Huberdeau's head shot on Iafallo

It's not that Matthews did not deserve supplemental discipline for his actions in the Heritage Classic game, it's more that what he did to Rasmus Dahlin has been done by other players - as many as 18 other players, in fact. Does anyone want to take a guess how many of those players were suspended? Gold star to those who guessed zero. You'd be correct.

It's almost like the league had rushed the suspension as well. Typically with these types of incidents, it's several hours, even a day before the Department of Player Safety offers a player a hearing or issues a fine. In Matthews' case, almost immediately following the final horn at the Heritage Classic, TSN's Chris Johnston had reported on Twitter that the league was looking at the cross check to Dahlin. it was announced not long after that Matthews would have a hearing for the play.

While other players have had their hearings take place in the afternoon with a decision not coming back until later in the evening or even the following day, Matthews' suspension was handed down almost instantaneously. It's almost as though the league has a different standard for dealing with supplemental discipline when a Leaf is involved (see Jason Spezza, Nazem Kadri).

Not enough evidence of a conspiracy against the Leafs? Alright. Why don't we take a look at another play from last night from a separate game - this time involving Florida Panthers superstar Jonathan Huberdeau and his blatant head shot on LA Kings forward Alex Iafallo.

Apparently the hit was a retaliatory one from an earlier altercation between Huberdeau and Iafallo. Take a look at the clip below and tell me why the league didn't even announce that it had reviewed the play and that no supplemental discipline was warranted.

I don't think it's a reach to suggest that the Head of the Department of Player Safety, George Parros, has a vendetta against the Leafs from his playing days with the Montreal Canadiens. I think we're long past due the point where a new mind is needed in that role. I just don't think a former player with their potential biases is right for the position - especially a former enforcer who certainly had a hard time following the rules when he played. A neutral third party is the answer here. A governing body with no skin in the game.