Checking to the head

In Game 1 of the Detroit - Anaheim series, Mike Brown took a run at Jiri Hudler and got a five-minute penalty but no suspension. Here's the hit:

Earlier, in the East, Donald Brashear got a five-game suspension for hitting Blair Betts:

Here's what the NHL had to say about the Brashear suspension, according to NHL.com:

NHL disciplinarian Colin Campbell says he felt the hit was delivered late and targeted Betts' head.

So, wait, hitting a player's head is legal but grounds for a suspension?

The NHL has no rule about headshots, and both the league and players' association are opposed to one. Most of the objections are some variation of the repellent Mike Milbury's argument that any rule change to improve player safety is "pansification". Having said that, though, the fact that there is no rule against headshots in the league doesn't stop the league from handing out suspensions because of it.

It's absolutely bizarre. In my opinion, there's no question that Mike Brown deliberately hits Jiri Hudler's head. As of this writing, Brown isn't getting a suspension. How on earth can this possibly be justified? One player gets five games for a hit to the head, another gets nothing.

The situation where hits to the head are both allowed and not allowed, and where one player gets five games for a hit and another gets nothing, is ridiculous. I'd say it's making a mockery of the NHL's discipline and refereeing, if that was possible. It's enough of a joke as it is. I'm tempted to say something acidic and highly critical about, for instance, Tyler Kennedy slashing Viktor Kozlov's stick to pieces yesterday, with the referee looking on but apparently not feeling like making a call. I just can't be bothered any more as the bias in favor of that particular team is so ridiculously blatant it's barely worth commenting on any more.