Incredibly Late-Period Penalties

Something has been on my mind for a while now, and I never really took the time to mention anything about it. Better late than never I guess. Anyway... A while back, something really irritated the hell out of me and I'm going to talk about it whether you like it or not.

May 10, 2009. I'm watching the Bruins and Hurricanes, who appeared to be getting increasingly hostile with each other as the game progressed, especially in the 3rd period. Hope for the Hurricanes to win the game was long gone at this point, I was just watching for kicks now. But late in the 3rd period, something happened. And by "late," I really mean late. There must have been 1-2 seconds left in the period, and subsequently, the entire game. A big hoo-ha breaks out, fists are flying everywhere, it's a slobberknocker on the ice, and to top it all off, Milan Lucic is sent off on a misconduct. As I'm sitting there, amused by the referees' temporary lack of ability to restrain the players, I realized, they stopped the clock. No biggie, right? Any other point in the game, it would indeed be no biggie. But this was the 3rd period, and there were 1-3 seconds left.
Simply put, I got to wait a few minutes until the puck dropped and the final 1-3 seconds were officially burned off the clock and Boston could tally up a win. I waited several minutes for a 1-3 second countdown.

This wasn't the first time my rage was aroused by a late-period penalty that forced a several minute-long waiting period before the final 3 seconds of a period or game could be officially counted down. It has happened before- not much, but it still happens nonetheless.

I don't know if this is normal, but I just don't understand why the clock has to be stopped to address a penalty... when there's 2 seconds left in the period. All it does is burn up time before the period inevitably ends. Maybe it's just me, but it would be much wiser (and time-saving) to wait until the period is over, and just carry over the penalty to the next period. Instead of starting the period on the powerplay for 1:59, why not make it the full 2 minutes? I know that may not seem like much of a difference. We'll all agree that it isn't. At all. But think about how much time it would save in the final seconds of the last period. Instead of burning up a minute or two for addressing the penalty, the clock isn't stopped, no time is wasted, and the penalty carries over to the next period in it's entirety. It may only save a minute or two, which isn't much, but it does spare the arousal of my anger, which would be flaring if the penalty had delayed the end of the period.

So that's my proposed solution to really, really, really, really late-period penalty calls.

But what if it's the 3rd period?

My proposal still stands. I just don't see a point in stopping the clock when there's 2 seconds left to send a player to the penalty box when they'll only spend 2 seconds there. I think it would make much more sense to just let the clock burn out and let the penalty go. It just wouldn't be worth it to keep him in the box and let play resume if it will last only 2 seconds. And it would save me plenty of unneccessary rage.

Ice Hockey In The South

I'm tired of the banter, the one-sided debate, I want this settled once and for all.

Ice hockey in the south.

Now I know that there are some people here that will be ready to start a war as soon as their eyes see those words above. Before the condemners start going off here, I just want to say, this is not intended to cast you aside and totally ignore what you have to say. Your opinions are acknowledged. Okay? Cool.
Anyway.... I understand this can be a touchy subject. So many opinions supporting either side of this debate, it can get quite disorientating. I don't want that here. So what I'm going to do is acknowledge both sides of the argument before I say what I want to say, to be fair.

Hockey in the south be damned! Sound familiar? If you oppose hockey in places like Anaheim, Glendale, Dallas, Atlanta, Sunrise, Tampa, or simply any location in the southern portion of the US, then it should ring a bell.
You sure present quite compelling arguments. Of course warm-weather areas aren't exactly the first thing that enters one's mind when one thinks of ice hockey. 35 years ago, if you would have told a Winnipeg Jets fan that his/her beloved team would be relocated someday, they probably wouldn't believe you. If you told them the relocation would be to Arizona, they'd likely consider you insane. And who can blame them, it's what a lot of people thought when the Atlanta Flames entered the league. Sure they failed and were moved to Calgary, why wouldn't they be?They were placed in a bad market area, unfit for hockey. No suprise they never made it all that far in the playoffs, right?
Speaking of Arizona, as mentioned earlier, the Coyotes' financial situation is just killer, isn't it? Being in such a financial slump is bad enough, but such a team in a place like Glendale only muddies the waters, right? After all, it's definitely not a hockey market. Nontraditional, if you will. And when you consider the shape of the economy, well, we all know what's up there. And apparently so do those Canadian journalists who want nothing more than for the Coyotes to move up north again. And who can blame them? They lost their beloved Jets in the American desert. That's not the best way to make a Canadian fan happy. Or any fan at all. Unless you just happen to live in that particular desert, and you just HAPPEN to like ice hockey. In which case, that's exactly how to please a fan. But you're not a fan in the south, are you? Never mind the fact that the Southeast Division has churned out only 2 Stanley Cup champions in recent years, and 3 in the Pacific. Nothing to "ooh" and "aah" at. Unless the team is being moved, in which case, "ooh" and "aah" at will.
Perhaps the economy doesn't have to be all bad. It means Phoenix's issues are only made worse, thus strengthening the possibility of having them relocated, which is just what you want.
Phoenix and Nashville have their financial problems, the Atlanta Thrashers have never been too impressive in their time in the playoffs, the Panthers haven't made the playoffs since 2001. And they're all somewhere in the south. Coincidence? If you're not one for putting a hockey team in the deep south, maybe.

Long live southern hockey! This should be the battle cry for the thousands and thousands of fans who flock the BankAtlantic Center or the Jobing.com Arena to see their beloved ice-bound warriors give them a good show. After all, hockey is for everyone, right? No matter where you live? But of course.
Diversity is a truly great quality that should apply to everything. And ice hockey definitely falls under that category. After all, when the Lightning won the Cup in 2004, how many people do you think they proved wrong that hockey in a place like Florida could work out? In a place where college football reigns supreme, having a Stanley Cup from that area had to feel good, right? And ask any longtime Panthers fan if they were there when the Panthers made the Stanley Cup finals in 1996. Sure, they were swept. But they made it that far. Florida, of all teams! Of all places to base an ice hockey team in. Of course it's been over a decade since Florida saw the Cup finals. But they know their time is coming.
But back to the "diversity" thing. If you want more proof that diversity in hockey works, look outside the US and Canada. Look at other nations. Look at Australia. They have their own league and are a part of the IIHF, right? Just like Israel, the first Middle Eastern nation to be in the IIHF. Ice hockey in Israel has come a long way, but it's still running strong. Their men's squad was almost in the top division a few times. And the World Jewish Ice Hockey Tournament is coming up, to be held in Metula, Israel.

Ice hockey has existed in the south for a while now, long enough for a strong fan base to develop down there. What about the folks who spend more time at the Philips Arena or American Airlines Arena than they do anywhere else? What would they do if their favorite team was relocated? While attendance may be down in most southern arenas, there's still a decent enough showing. Fans who are just like any other. What makes a Coyotes fan any different from a Leafs fan? A Stars fan from a Rangers fan? A Thrashers fan from a RedWings fan? Absolutely nothing. So before you start fantasizing about the Coyotes moving back to Manitoba, think about those loyal desert-based fans who love their team as much as you love yours.
I grew up believing in diversity of all kinds, including locational diversity. When I first became a hockey fan, and I saw that there were places like Phoenix, Tampa, Sunrise, these hot-weather cities with ice hockey teams, I didn't think anything of it, it didn't seem unnatural because I really just liked hockey. I thought it was a pretty cool concept. It's different, and it gives the NHL (and hockey as a whole) more of a fan base, and thus more recognition. Ice hockey is a truly great sport. And sports have the power to unite people, and bring people together. Hockey should be no exception. To make it work, it should be played in places we least expect it to be played. The 3 other major sports leagues (MLB, NBA, NFL) have their teams spread throughout the country. The NHL might as well do the same. And of course they do. And in my opinion, it is a good move.