What constitutes deliberate in deliberate illegal substitution?

[timelydew]

I asked a question about awarded goals and illegal substitutions recently, but the thought never occured to me - what falls under "deliberate", in deliberate illegal substitution exactly? The rule is weird - it's under rule 68, but that just refers you to rule 74, where it's separate.The NHL book just lists that the penalty exists, without going into detail about what situations are subject to it.

 

Obviously, intent is crucial. I know that Roger Nielson essentially is the father of the rule, in that he'd keep sending a fourth penalty killer over the boards during a 5 on 3. The provision for a penalty shot was added for the last two minutes or OT.

 

Basically, I'm wondering if all the situations in rule 68 could fall under "deliberate," or if it has to be on the direction of the coach for it to be deemed as such. I'm thinking of especially of a player leaving the penalty box before his penalty expires. If it's obvious he somehow left early to jump on the ice to gain an advantage, I assume that is worthy of the call? What about the situation (like last week) where a team fails to produce a player to serve a major penalty in the box, and they send on a player from the player's bench upon the penalty expiring? What if the coach was unaware this was illegal? Both are illegal substitutions per rule 68, but are they "deliberate" enough to be, well, deliberate?