Was Rondo's foul flagrant? Depends where you live
8:26 AM Wed, Apr 29, 2009 | Permalink
Email
| Email this entry
 |
 |
Projo Sports Blog |
|
« Bruins-Hurricanes series dates and times |
Main
| Celtics and Bulls set NBA record for overtime games in series »
It's a shame that, after four terrific games (and just one blowout) in this Celtics-Bulls playoff series, so much talk has focused on the officiating -- something that is, unfortunately, very typical in the NBA these days. Over the weekend, the idea of a dark conspiracy was planted, when The Boston Globe reported that an NBA source had pointed out that two of the officials -- Bill Kennedy and Dan Crawford -- were Chicago natives and that family members of both Kennedy and Crawford departed Game 4 wearing Bulls gear. That game featured an overturned flagrant foul call on the Bulls' Brad Miller, which ultimately allowed Miller to remain in the game. Celtics coach Doc Rivers was fined $25,000 after Game 4 for saying that Kendrick Perkins was being unfairly targeted for moving screen fouls. On Tuesday night, the topic of contention was Rajon Rondo's hard foul on Miller in the final seconds of overtime. The foul prevented an easy layup after the Bulls had badly fooled the Celtics on an inbound with 3 seconds left. The foul left Miller bleeding from the mouth; after a brief delay, Miller (who as an excellent foul shooter) missed his first foul shot. He intentionally missed the second, but the Celtics secured the rebound, and with it a two-point victory. Whether the Bulls should have had two shots and the ball seems to come down to what uniform you were wearing -- or in what city you happen to reside. Here's what Rondo had to say about the play: "I was going for the ball, but Miller, I don't know, he's probably 290 [pounds], maybe more than that. I'm a little guy, so I had to go for the foul hard. I wasn't trying to take a guy out or hit his head." Doc Rivers commended Rondo for a making a great, heads-up play in a crucial situation. Miller felt quite differently, and he hinted that Rondo might have a few nasty surprises waiting for him in Thursday night's Game 6: "I understand hard fouls. But when you get hit in the mouth over the shoulders, that stuff just gets old after a while. We've got another game. We'll strap it on and see what happens." ESPN's Tim Legler said Wednesday morning that he did not think a flagrant call was warranted; while Jalen Rose thought it was. The Globe's Marc Spears said on SportsCenter that the Rondo foul was the kind of foul that is to be expected in the playoffs. But Steve Rosenbloom (writing to the hometown Chicago audience) wrote that the flagrant foul call should have been "obvious": "Miller should've gotten his shots and the Bulls should've gotten the ball out of bounds after Rajon Rondo raked Miller's face and gave him a fat lip." Rosenbloom did allow that the Bulls really only have themselves to blame for their loss, since they blew an 11-point lead in the fourth quarter. Here's some of what the amusingly named Bulls fan site Pippen Ain't Easy had to say about it all, in a post that focused on trashing Kevin Garnett for his sideline cheerleading: "Shortly after Derrick Rose was mugged by Kendrick Perkins after Rose beat him to a missed shot for an offensive rebound, there was Rajon Rondo swooping into to try and decapitate Brad Miller. Rondo's slashing hand came nowhere near the ball. It slammed into Miller's neck and face. It was clearly a flagrant foul, but that was not the call. Miller ended up bloody, and surely dazed. He had to try and get it together quickly to attempt 2 free throws to tie the game. He missed the first, and there was Kevin Garnett clearly seen yelling at Miller that he was a choker. Garnett is either dim-witted, particularly mean-spirited or both." Of course, you'd be hard-pressed to find any basketball fan in New England this morning who would concede any of that. And if you watched Tuesday night's game on Comcast Sports Net, you might have thought that the officials were really in the bag for the Bulls; at least that was the opinion of Tommy Heinsohn, who was beside himself even more than usual, even calling one foul call against Ray Allen (who fouled out in the fourth quarter) the "weakest call" he had ever seen in his long life. The Bulls went to the line a lot more than the Celtics in the game: 32-24, and they made very good use of those shots, hitting 27 for an 84.4 shooting percentage. If only they had made those final two, all of this talk might be irrelevant. 
7 CommentsLeave a comment |
New comments
New photos
Authors
New posts
Projo blogs
Archives
Interesting article. I agree with the comments about the officiating and "it depends where you live"!
I'm a Celtics fan and live in Boston, so I think the officiating has been against the Celtics. I agree the Rondo's foul was hard but you can't let a guy get a layup to tie the game. Even if they get the flagrant foul, Miller still misses the first shot and who knows about the second shot. The only difference is the Bulls get the ball with 2 seconds. Nothing certain with 2 seconds.
Let's talk about Ray Allen getting called for several cheap fouls that totally took him out of the game in the 2nd half. He had to sit early in the 3rd quarter on a tick-tack foul, which was his 4th foul. Then on the moving/illegal pick that got Allen tied up with Miller and gave him his 6th foul and he was gone.
Who's more important than Allen for the Celtics in the 4th quarter and/or OT. Everyone has seen him make clutch 3 points at the end of games, but don't forget his defense. He is a great defensive guard and is needed to defend the tough Bulls guards. If Allen's in there at the end of the game, who knows.... maybe he hits a 3 point field goal somewhere and then there's no need for OT. Then there would have been no Rondo foul on Miller and nothing for the Bulls fans to cry about.
Bottom line: It goes both ways!!!
Report Abuse
Interesting article. I agree with the comments about the officiating and "it depends where you live"!
I'm a Celtics fan and live in Boston, so I think the officiating has been against the Celtics. I agree the Rondo's foul was hard but you can't let a guy get a layup to tie the game. Even if they get the flagrant foul, Miller still misses the first shot and who knows about the second shot. The only difference is the Bulls get the ball with 2 seconds. Nothing certain with 2 seconds.
Let's talk about Ray Allen getting called for several cheap fouls that totally took him out of the game in the 2nd half. He had to sit early in the 3rd quarter on a tick-tack foul, which was his 4th foul. Then on the moving/illegal pick that got Allen tied up with Miller and gave him his 6th foul and he was gone.
Who's more important than Allen for the Celtics in the 4th quarter and/or OT. Everyone has seen him make clutch 3 points at the end of games, but don't forget his defense. He is a great defensive guard and is needed to defend the tough Bulls guards. If Allen's in there at the end of the game, who knows.... maybe he hits a 3 point field goal somewhere and then there's no need for OT. Then there would have been no Rondo foul on Miller and nothing for the Bulls fans to cry about.
Bottom line: It goes both ways!!!
Report Abuse
Brad Miller is the Bulls' enforcer. Bulls are now down 3-2. It's payback time now for the Celtics to receive the hard fouls via Tyrus & Noah. The refs will fear the bloodlust of the United Center crowd. Watch...the ghost of Norm Van Lear will take out that punk Rondo.
Report Abuse
The Celtics have had a bull's eye on their backs all season. No harm, no foul.
Report Abuse
Rondo was so far away from the ball there's no way that he was going for the ball. He was clearly going for the foul. I would have more respect for the action had he tried to undercut Miller at the legs. Because intent to injure can't be ascertained, there should be no suspension but the foul was clearly flagrant.
Report Abuse
Rondo was so far away from the ball there's no way that he was going for the ball. He was clearly going for the foul. I would have more respect for the action had he tried to undercut Miller at the legs. Because intent to injure can't be ascertained, there should be no suspension but the foul was clearly flagrant.
Report Abuse
Rondo was so far away from the ball there's no way that he was going for the ball. He was clearly going for the foul. I would have more respect for the action had he tried to undercut Miller at the legs. Because intent to injure can't be ascertained, there should be no suspension but the foul was clearly flagrant.
Report Abuse