- Jul 28, 2016
- 24,091
- 35,403
Accidental offside is an error not a penalty
The Corey Oates Incident
- Thread starter Big Pete
- Start date
I personally think the type of injury or concern plays a big part in the decision too.
Also, whether or not foul play was involved. But for this topic, let's assume it's just an unfortunate accident.
Whilst extremely painful, possibly career ending and ultimately sad no matter the player, if it's a broken leg or ruptured knee etc. then play doesn't necessarily need to stop unless there is a possibility that allowing play to continue will further escalate the problem (e.g. play remains around or comes back across the injured player and risks their wellbeing). Next play-the-ball or stoppage (knock-on, dead ball etc.), by all means stop play.
Head knocks are a totally different story though. The impact, the sound, the motionless player that quickly turned into convulsing on the ground all made it clear that it was incredibly serious.
People can die from collisions like that so absolutely stop play immediately - no question in my mind. I also think that's why the rules allow the referee to use such discretion.
Broncos or not, I have no problem with the stoppage and hope the referees don't get scared / bullied out of doing the right thing next time.
Also, whether or not foul play was involved. But for this topic, let's assume it's just an unfortunate accident.
Whilst extremely painful, possibly career ending and ultimately sad no matter the player, if it's a broken leg or ruptured knee etc. then play doesn't necessarily need to stop unless there is a possibility that allowing play to continue will further escalate the problem (e.g. play remains around or comes back across the injured player and risks their wellbeing). Next play-the-ball or stoppage (knock-on, dead ball etc.), by all means stop play.
Head knocks are a totally different story though. The impact, the sound, the motionless player that quickly turned into convulsing on the ground all made it clear that it was incredibly serious.
People can die from collisions like that so absolutely stop play immediately - no question in my mind. I also think that's why the rules allow the referee to use such discretion.
Broncos or not, I have no problem with the stoppage and hope the referees don't get scared / bullied out of doing the right thing next time.
- Oct 28, 2013
- 12,489
- 13,203
I'd be blowing up if it was us who got called back.
Accept
NRL Captain
- Sep 27, 2016
- 3,466
- 3,895
And so would have most Bronco fans (especially if they ended up losing), they just won't admit it. Personally, the officials did the right thing and it wouldn't have bothered me either way.
Accept
NRL Captain
- Sep 27, 2016
- 3,466
- 3,895
I think his GP will have the last say. Not many players get stretchered off and then suit up the following week.
The concise version of my own post:
Foul play - stop play immediately.
Potentially life threatening - stop play immediately.
Not potentially life threatening - judged case by case.
- Jul 28, 2016
- 24,091
- 35,403
I wouldn't be....If it happened in reverse I might be a little pissed at the time, but I wouldn't be blowing up and claiming it single handedly cost us the game despite it occurring around 20min mark.
The speed of the injury was so quick I thought sitting in the crowd that Oates had been hit by a Penrith shoulder charge
To me there should be less scrutiny on the refs, who made the right call, and more on the Penrith player who picked up the ball that lay next to 2 motionless bodies and think it is appropriate to pick it up and try and capitalise on the situation
theshed
Just a Game
- Aug 28, 2010
- 15,523
- 36,147
Shouldn't be scrutiny on anyone. Oates was obviously seriously injured and it was noticeable immediately. The Penrith players did exactly what they have been trained their whole lives to do, and that is play to the whistle. The broncos players should have done the same, though I completely understand why they didn't. No harm was done by picking up that loose ball. If they had made a tackle (like Hodges on Morris), or stripped the ball from him than that would be a different story.
All in all I think the right thing was done by everyone involved but it should have been play on based on the rules. If a fullback and winger clash trying to take a bomb causing one to drop it and eventually results in a try, how injured out of 10 do they have to be before you take the try off the kicking team?
- Oct 28, 2013
- 12,489
- 13,203
Rubbish. Balls on the ground, entitled to pick it up and run. Should have been play on and a Penrith try.
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,475
- 68,956
No it shouldn't have been, at least not without checking. It likely was an accidental offside against Milford, unlikely Penrith would have got a try from it but even so, I have no problem with the decisions the ref made given how serious it looked and in particualr, sounded.
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,595
- 27,251
So the rules haven't changed your opinion?
- Oct 28, 2013
- 12,489
- 13,203
If they allowed the panthers to play on, as they should have, and reviewed it, it would have gone up as a try and no way they overturn it.
- Feb 27, 2010
- 29,871
- 12,197
Which part about it being a potentially life threatening injury and thus, immediate stoppage, doesn't get through to you?
- Jan 25, 2014
- 44,359
- 33,590
It would have been overturned.
Due to the fact it was an accidental offside and play can't continue when that happens, it has to be stopped and restarted with a scrum.
- Oct 28, 2013
- 12,489
- 13,203
People get ko'd often in this sport. I can't remember play being halted in that way before. Like I said originally I know I'm going to be in the minority, but still think Penrith can feel hard done by in that instance.
