Author Topic: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?  (Read 21088 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #45 on: January 28, 2009, 06:11:13 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
I've seen a heckuva lot worse.

I don't really have a huge issue with it.  To me, it was a hard foul.

According to today's standards, its a flagrant but I don't see the need for a huge uproar about it. 

Kermit Washington punch of Rudy T. is the only one that comes to mind.

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #46 on: January 28, 2009, 06:17:22 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32615
  • Tommy Points: 1730
  • What a Pub Should Be
I've seen a heckuva lot worse.

I don't really have a huge issue with it.  To me, it was a hard foul.

According to today's standards, its a flagrant but I don't see the need for a huge uproar about it. 

Worse than a broken rib and a collapsed lung. Could you name those?

See, that's the unfortunate outcome of the contact.  What I'm looking at and commenting on is the actuall FOUL.  You really think Bynum intended to break his rib and collapse his lung? His threw his shoulder/elbow into Wallace's airborne body.  That landing sure as heck couldn't have helped Wallace's cause, either.

Yes, I've seen a lot worse.  Clotheslines, undercutting on a layup, etc. Pretty blatant crap. Go back and look at tape of '70s,'80s, and even '90s ball and you'll see plenty of examples of fouls that looked a heckuva lot worse than what transpired last night.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #47 on: January 28, 2009, 06:19:45 PM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
Wallace got hurt when he hit the floor, not when Bynum hit him.  I've watched that replay 5 times now.  It wasn't even an elbow.

It was a badly executed flop, that's all.  Tony Allen was injured more seriously than that trying to dunk after the whistle, untouched.  Stuff happens.

I like Gerald Wallace's game and hope he makes a speedy recovery. But let's not villify Bynum for a fairly routine foul.  It was a clumsy play, not a dirty play.

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #48 on: January 28, 2009, 06:21:14 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32615
  • Tommy Points: 1730
  • What a Pub Should Be
I've seen a heckuva lot worse.

I don't really have a huge issue with it.  To me, it was a hard foul.

According to today's standards, its a flagrant but I don't see the need for a huge uproar about it. 

Kermit Washington punch of Rudy T. is the only one that comes to mind.


That wasn't a foul committed during gameplay.  That occurred during a full scale brawl on the floor.  Apples & Oranges.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #49 on: January 28, 2009, 06:22:35 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
I've seen a heckuva lot worse.

I don't really have a huge issue with it.  To me, it was a hard foul.

According to today's standards, its a flagrant but I don't see the need for a huge uproar about it. 

Worse than a broken rib and a collapsed lung. Could you name those?

See, that's the unfortunate outcome of the contact.  What I'm looking at and commenting on is the actuall FOUL.  You really think Bynum intended to break his rib and collapse his lung? His threw his shoulder/elbow into Wallace's airborne body.  That landing sure as heck couldn't have helped Wallace's cause, either.

Yes, I've seen a lot worse.  Clotheslines, undercutting on a layup, etc. Pretty blatant crap. Go back and look at tape of '70s,'80s, and even '90s ball and you'll see plenty of examples of fouls that looked a heckuva lot worse than what transpired last night.

He threw his elbow into his ribs in mid air. Broke his ribs and collapsed his lung. In McHale's clothesline of Rambis, Rambis got right back up. I'm talking about an actual injury caused by an elbow thrown at a guy in the air, right into his ribs. Why put the elbow out there if you're not trying to hurt someone?

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #50 on: January 28, 2009, 06:23:20 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
I've seen a heckuva lot worse.

I don't really have a huge issue with it.  To me, it was a hard foul.

According to today's standards, its a flagrant but I don't see the need for a huge uproar about it. 

Kermit Washington punch of Rudy T. is the only one that comes to mind.


That wasn't a foul committed during gameplay.  That occurred during a full scale brawl on the floor.  Apples & Oranges.

Right. I said it was worse...

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #51 on: January 28, 2009, 06:24:21 PM »

Offline Thruthelookingglass

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2687
  • Tommy Points: 133
If Gerald Wallace thinks it was a dirty play, he has my permission to clothesline Kobe the next time the Bobcats play the Lakers.

But if he does that he'd be suspended. ;D

Not if I were the commissioner.

Brick, wow, I think you'd usher in a renaissance for the NBA.  Gutsy play, put up or shut up, just like the game that hooked me in the eighties.  I'm on board!  But please . . . no short shorts again!

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #52 on: January 28, 2009, 06:28:41 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32615
  • Tommy Points: 1730
  • What a Pub Should Be
I've seen a heckuva lot worse.

I don't really have a huge issue with it.  To me, it was a hard foul.

According to today's standards, its a flagrant but I don't see the need for a huge uproar about it. 

Worse than a broken rib and a collapsed lung. Could you name those?

See, that's the unfortunate outcome of the contact.  What I'm looking at and commenting on is the actuall FOUL.  You really think Bynum intended to break his rib and collapse his lung? His threw his shoulder/elbow into Wallace's airborne body.  That landing sure as heck couldn't have helped Wallace's cause, either.

Yes, I've seen a lot worse.  Clotheslines, undercutting on a layup, etc. Pretty blatant crap. Go back and look at tape of '70s,'80s, and even '90s ball and you'll see plenty of examples of fouls that looked a heckuva lot worse than what transpired last night.

He threw his elbow into his ribs in mid air. Broke his ribs and collapsed his lung. In McHale's clothesline of Rambis, Rambis got right back up. I'm talking about an actual injury caused by an elbow thrown at a guy in the air, right into his ribs. Why put the elbow out there if you're not trying to hurt someone?

Well, for one thing, Bynum was late to the spot defending and got caught in the precarious situation of being sideways while a guy is coming airborne at him.  Wallace had him beat to the spot and Bynum was in no man's land where contact was unavoidable.  

I'm not talking about the injury at all.  Obviously a collapsed lung and broken rib is nothing to laugh about and is pretty serious stuff.  I'm simply commenting on the foul.  


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #53 on: January 28, 2009, 06:33:50 PM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
I'm not talking about the injury at all.  Obviously a collapsed lung and broken rib is nothing to laugh about and is pretty serious stuff.  I'm simply commenting on the foul.  


Exactly.  If Rambis had suffered a broken back, it makes McHale's clothesline no more or less clean, and the same is true of Bynum's foul / Wallace's injury.

In terms of fouls resulting in worse injuries, Horford's foul on T.J. Ford qualifies, I think.  I can't remember what Horford got for a suspension, but this one was no worse than that.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #54 on: January 28, 2009, 06:37:41 PM »

Offline ScoobyDoo

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2644
  • Tommy Points: 447
In my book, that is acomplete flagrant foul without question. Bynum "should" be suspended for at least one game.

Like alot of you I grew up playing school yard ball where you kind of played the "no blood, no foul" brand of basketball. Yeah, you wack a guy across the arm when he's shooting it's foul, you bang him hard as you steal the ball, it's a foul. But you bump his hip with yours as he's shooting? No foul. You bang the crap out of each other under the boards, no foul.

There is a very large and very clear differnce between a good old fashioned hard foul that is hard but safe and clean and what Bynum did on that play.

You 'never" hit a guy who's airborne or going airborne and you "never" just take a random shot at a guy without seriously trying for the ball. Period.

Bynum made no play for the ball, he just threw his elbow into Wallace as he was airborne. Flagrant. Very clear.

Somebody should have taken Bynum's head off on the next play too. This guy's starting to turn into a little bit of a punk. He gave LeBron a good shot across the face on another play too.

And I don't think it's because he's clumsy.

Finally, I think Perkins gives some hard fouls but not cheap shots. That was a cheap shot from Bynum and something you'd also expect from guys like Jermaine O'neal.

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #55 on: January 28, 2009, 06:41:54 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
I'm not talking about the injury at all.  Obviously a collapsed lung and broken rib is nothing to laugh about and is pretty serious stuff.  I'm simply commenting on the foul.  


Exactly.  If Rambis had suffered a broken back, it makes McHale's clothesline no more or less clean, and the same is true of Bynum's foul / Wallace's injury.

In terms of fouls resulting in worse injuries, Horford's foul on T.J. Ford qualifies, I think.  I can't remember what Horford got for a suspension, but this one was no worse than that.

Horford was going for a block. Bynum just threw an elbow. If McHale had broken Rambis' back it would have been a lot worse of a foul. But Rambis was unharmed.


Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #56 on: January 28, 2009, 06:42:09 PM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
Brick, wow, I think you'd usher in a renaissance for the NBA.  Gutsy play, put up or shut up, just like the game that hooked me in the eighties.  I'm on board!  But please . . . no short shorts again!

If Wendell Ladner is reading this thread, he is turning over in his grave.  He would have played without any shorts at all, but in today's NBA he'd be suspended most of the time.  Same goes for Ricky Mahorn.

Ricky had the right idea.  Little people don't belong in the paint, and when they go in there you have to hurt them.

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #57 on: January 28, 2009, 06:44:56 PM »

Online bdm860

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6136
  • Tommy Points: 4624
Watching the play, I definitely don't think it was flagrant, but not surprised to see it called a flagrant in today's NBA.  (Me and today's refs have a much different opinion on how the game should be called though).

First time through, in real time, to me it looked liked Bynum just was  late trying to take a charge and came in at kind of an awkward angle.  On the replays it looked a little worse with Bynum's arms raised (but all fouls look worse and more malicious than they really are in slow mo).  I felt on the replays it looked more like Bynum was just trying to stop the play, but did it poorly, again nothing malicious to me.

For those claiming there was no play on the ball, that is completely irrelevant.  Making a play for the ball has nothing to do with a flagrant (although  that situation is mostly associated with flagrants).  There is no play for the ball when a player attempts to take a charge - and those are not flagrants.  On most blocking fouls - which is what I would call this - there is no play for the ball.

Straight from the rulebook - flagrants are for unnecessary contact (flagrant 1) or unnecessary and excessive (flagrant 2).  I know most of you think this was unnecessary and excessive, and you all are entitled to your opinion, but in my opinion stopping a player driving to the lane, especially the way Bynum did it, is neither unnecessary or excessive.  Plays like that happen every game.  Players get beat up driving to the hoop, that's why punks like Vince Carter don't do it anymore.  No doubt the outcome is very unfortunate though, but I don't think for a second Bynum tried to hurt him, he just tried to stop him from driving and did it very poorly.

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_12.html?nav=ArticleList
Quote
Section IV--Flagrant Foul
a. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary, a flagrant foul--penalty (1) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team.
PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, the opposing coach will select any player from the bench to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. (EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e.) (4) The injured player may not return to the game. (5) A player will be ejected if he commits two flagrant fouls in the same game.
b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpret-ed to be unnecessary and excessive, a flagrant foul--penalty (2) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team.
PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, his coach will select a substitute and any player from the team is eligible to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e. (4) The injured player may return to the game at any time after the free throws are attempted. (5) This is an unsports-manlike act and the offender is ejected.
c. A flagrant foul may be assessed whether the ball is dead or alive.

After 18 months with their Bigs, the Littles were: 46% less likely to use illegal drugs, 27% less likely to use alcohol, 52% less likely to skip school, 37% less likely to skip a class

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #58 on: January 28, 2009, 06:57:08 PM »

Offline ScoobyDoo

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2644
  • Tommy Points: 447
If someone got seriously hurt but it was clear that the defender was making a clear play for the ball with out any malicious intent there should be no flagrant. If there is no clear play on the ball and someone gets seriously hurt on the play it should be a flagrant. I think it should be a flagrant whetehr someone is hurt or not if the defender is not making a play on the ball and just wacking someone like Bynum did here. Otherwise you're playing football, not basketball.

Ot I'll put it another way. If a defender came in low and kind of took the offensive player out around the kneew/waist area as he was going up and it was clear that defender was making no play on the ball and simply giving a hard foul...and if the defender accidently got a knee in the head and was knocked unconscious and the offensive play flopped over to the floor but was perfectly fine...I'd still call a flagrant on the unconscious defender on the floor.

I think it has everything to do with intent ( whetehr you are making an honest play for the ball or not) and it's generally not real hard to tell the difference.

Had Wallace fallen on his head and broken his neck, should it then be flagrant? Would that make it bad enough?     

Re: Tape of Bynum Flagrant?
« Reply #59 on: January 28, 2009, 07:01:57 PM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
I'm not talking about the injury at all.  Obviously a collapsed lung and broken rib is nothing to laugh about and is pretty serious stuff.  I'm simply commenting on the foul.  


Exactly.  If Rambis had suffered a broken back, it makes McHale's clothesline no more or less clean, and the same is true of Bynum's foul / Wallace's injury.

In terms of fouls resulting in worse injuries, Horford's foul on T.J. Ford qualifies, I think.  I can't remember what Horford got for a suspension, but this one was no worse than that.

Horford was going for a block. Bynum just threw an elbow. If McHale had broken Rambis' back it would have been a lot worse of a foul. But Rambis was unharmed.



Worse in terms of results, maybe, but not worse in terms of the dirtiness of the play.  Either a play is or is not dirty, regardless of resulting injuries.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions