Is this ruling correct?

[chube]

As reported on pokernews:

Out of Turn, Now Out of Tournament

On a flop of 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], the small blind bets out 4,800 and Swedish player Alex Holm goes into the tank. Before he can act, a player behind him announces "All in" (holding around 25,000). The floor is called over and it is ruled that if Alex calls, the out of turn action will stand.

Alex calls, the out of turn player is all in, the SB folds, and Alex quickly calls, opening 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] for a flopped set. The out of turn player has 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] for top two pair. The turn and river blank out and the out of turn player is out of the tournament.
----------------------------

Should the out of turn action have been binding? It probably didn't affect the ultimate outcome, but it seems to me that once Alex Holm calls (knowing he'll then have an allin raise behind him) it pretty much tips off the hand to the SB who may or may not of folded. At least it was the guy who acted out of turn who got "punished" but I thought in most cases out of turn action is usually nullified or stands as is.