Obstruction Rule

Last weeks game against the Knights, the Knights second try was scored after a clear Obstruction. The obstruction part is not up for debate, the bunker identified it in their review. The Bunker then went on to state the Obstruction is ok because Dylan had enough time to dust himself off and get ready to make a tackle.Is that right? I thought the Obstruction rule was pretty black and white and once it occurred the play was dead. Does this mean obstruction is now within the rules provided there is a big enough gap between when the obstruction occurs and when the try is scored? How big does the time gap need to be?

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I thought they got that wrong given how black and white they've been this season. Mann initiates contact with the defender, which impedes the side's ability to defend the play. Dunster only comes in because the ball gets outside Dylan Brown and an overlap is created. 

    • Yeah the refs made many glaring errors last round. 

      Really worrying considering we have the same rubbish refs for our game this weekend. 

      They bungled the penalty try according to Knights fans (disagree)

      They bungled the obstruction try according to us (fact) 

      They missed the block play on Moses - no call

      They nearly no called Fergo's crocodile roll injury until he blew up deluxe

      I'm sure there were other calls I'm forgetting

  • As much as it pains me to say it, the time has come when we need to make it obvious by falling down with arms flailing by all players in the vicinity. This includes against the Panthers blocking play when Cleary kicks from behind the ruck. They always have 2 players standing next to the play the ball to block markers from racing up and putting pressure on Cleary. In the first set against Penrith, if they have the usual 2 players standing next to the ruck, I would instruct our markers to break quickly, one on either side, and then fall over calling obstruction (by all players) if impeded trying to get to Cleary. Put it on them right from the get go to set the scene for the remainder of the game. I would fall over for every block play and every obstruction as this is the only way to keep them all honest. I am concerned that the guy in the bunker appears to be a life member of the Panthers? Can someone confirm this? He should be immediately swapped out if this is true claiming potential conflict of interest/ not at "arms length" from the decisions. We have had this problem before back in the 1970's with a referree who worked for the sponsors of the opposing team. It is simply not on and the club should make a formal request for a new bunker ref today. 

    • Yep if there is obstruction you are forced to take a dive or the refs won't rule in your favour

      A very sad state of affairs but if that it what it takes for them to notice - then so be it

    • That was inexperience shown by Dyl. Fall over and guarantee a penalty, expecially in a final

  • They screwed us over with that call. It is a black and white decision and it has to be.

  • It's hard to believe they got this one wrong. Does anyone know if Anusley mentioned it in his Monday morning self appreciation conference?

  • Definitely wrong decision but they had to make the game a bit competitive

  • The try shouldn't have been allowed based on how it has been adjudicated over the last few years, however, I actually think the bunker got it right in this instance. DB had ample opportunity to make a tackle on Hymel Hunt and just came up with a cold miss, as did Waqa & Maka. Common sense prevailed IMO. 

    • It was definitely common sense Brett, but the thing is the common sense rule hasn't been applied in any similar situation this year. If a block runner doesn't go clean through the defensive line, and takes out a defender, then it has been ruled an obstruction all year and thr tries have been declined.. that's the problem with the decision. 

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Poppa replied to Eels2025's discussion Jake Averillo & Josh Kerr
"No Randolph, if you haven't paid attention and therefore do not know.....don't comment.
In this case you are using Frank to be your artificial intelligence.....?? A dangerous practice unless you have extreme right wing ideas.
Lifted on your own…"
8 minutes ago
Zip zip replied to Eels2025's discussion Jake Averillo & Josh Kerr
"Looks like Phins making room for Cobbo and no doubt trying to lock in Katoa long term with a monster upgrade.
Averillo is certainly better than Russell, and more versatile. Can fill in multiple positions. 
Not sold on Josh Kerr, we are in need of…"
21 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Eels2025's discussion Jake Averillo & Josh Kerr
"I thought i had been quite polite about it Frank,
 "
27 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Eels2025's discussion Jake Averillo & Josh Kerr
""While I haven't been able to yet confirm this mail, it seems fairly reliable"....he should've paid for Express post with tracking if he wanted reliable"
30 minutes ago
More…