>>Rule 4.6e states that if the goalie of the penalized team has been removed
>>for another player at the time of the infraction, he shall be allowed to
>>return to the ice for the shot.  This indicates to me that, besides there
>>being no rule which explicitly awards a goal, goalies can be off the ice when
>>penalty shot situations occur and a goal is not necessarily awarded.
>
> And here's the clincher rule which puts this automatic goals question to
> rest...
>
> Rule 4-9c: A goal shall not be awarded as a penalty for any offense, such
>            as throwing a stick to prevent a goal or otherwise.
>
I'll be the first (well, maybe the third or fourth) to admit I was
wrong.  I know in the league I play in, automatic goals are awarded.
I'm fairly certain that it is the same in the NHL (anyone know for
sure?) and until today, thought it was the same in the NC$$.
 
Now for my other point: Does this make sense?  I would think that any
time there is a breakaway on an empty net, players would *want* to
throw their sticks or trip the player from behind.  There's a chance
the the thrown stick will prevent the easy goal and at least give the
goalie a chance to stop a penalty shot.
 
Pete Kester
[log in to unmask]