Marcus Smart's "ejection"

[Chris22]

Are you kidding me?

Crowder gets driven into the basket support and there's no call, and then Smart gets thrown out for holding the ball high.

Ridiculous.

[jpotter33]

Absolutely horrible. There's no way to prove intent on something like that. I fully expect the NBA to review that and downgrade it. Just ridiculous.

[GratefulCs]

Well, on the positive side, it was nice to see smart with a strong drive to the basket

[KG Living Legend]

 Actually to me it was, it was not over the top or anything but watch it again, he tries to make contact with his face,

[Chris22]

 Actually to me it was, it was not over the top or anything but watch it again, he tries to make contact with his face,

Sorry, no elbow was swung. He held the ball up just as Peyton came flying in.

[KG Living Legend]

 He pushed the elbow into the face on purpose,

[Chris22]

 He pushed the elbow into the face on purpose,

I don't think so.

[saltlover]

To think that was intentional while Smart was driving at full speed towards the hoop and about to jump is absurd.  Did he get his arm up to create space?  Sure.  That's an offensive foul that was properly called.  But flagrant 2 requires intent/not be a basketball play.  His eyes are squarely focused on the hoop -- he is not trying to hit Peyton in the face.  He's not looking at Peyton, who leans in just as Smart's elbow is flying out.  Don't think it should have been a flagrant at all, but a flagrant 2 is ridiculous.  You could find a couple worse hits per game than that when guys are flailing around getting a rebound.

[jpotter33]

To think that was intentional while Smart was driving at full speed towards the hoop and about to jump is absurd.  Did he get his arm up to create space?  Sure.  That's an offensive foul that was properly called.  But flagrant 2 requires intent/not be a basketball play.  His eyes are squarely focused on the hoop -- he is not trying to hit Peyton in the face.  He's not looking at Peyton, who leans in just as Smart's elbow is flying out.  Don't think it should have been a flagrant at all, but a flagrant 2 is ridiculous.  You could find a couple worse hits per game than that when guys are flailing around getting a rebound.

Exactly. Clearly an offensive foul, but there's absolutely no evidence that he did that maliciously to deserve a flagrant. Absolutely horrible call.

[tazzmaniac]

Absolutely horrible. There's no way to prove intent on something like that. I fully expect the NBA to review that and downgrade it. Just ridiculous.

The flagrant foul rule says nothing about intent.  Unnecessary contact is a flagrant-1.  Unnecessary and excessive contact is a flagrant-2.  It was clearly unnecessary contact.   Because the elbow struck the head, I think they'll leave it at a flagrant-2. 

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_b.html

[saltlover]

Absolutely horrible. There's no way to prove intent on something like that. I fully expect the NBA to review that and downgrade it. Just ridiculous.

The flagrant foul rule says nothing about intent.  Unnecessary contact is a flagrant-1.  Unnecessary and excessive contact is a flagrant-2.  It was clearly unnecessary contact.   Because the elbow struck the head, I think they'll leave it at a flagrant-2. 

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_b.html

Unnecessary contact can really describe any foul, you realize.  But intent is typically used as a way to separate unnecessary and excessive from common fouls.  Unnecessary and excessive is Harden kicking James while on the floor after the play is dead.  (Mind you, that wasn't called a flagrant 2 in game).  It was very aggressive defense and a player who was trying to fend off and create space.  The defender leaned his head into the ballhandler as he was beginning to extend his arm to create space while transferring the ball to his other hand to lay the ball up.  Quite simply, that was a basketball play, and this occurred in a split second while a player was going up for a shot.  If Smart punched him in the face and then shot it, sure, that's flagrant.  This was contact that occurred in the context of the play.  It was not excessive or unnecessary any more than your common offensive foul for charging or clearing out.

[tazzmaniac]

Absolutely horrible. There's no way to prove intent on something like that. I fully expect the NBA to review that and downgrade it. Just ridiculous.

The flagrant foul rule says nothing about intent.  Unnecessary contact is a flagrant-1.  Unnecessary and excessive contact is a flagrant-2.  It was clearly unnecessary contact.   Because the elbow struck the head, I think they'll leave it at a flagrant-2. 

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_b.html

Unnecessary contact can really describe any foul, you realize.  But intent is typically used as a way to separate unnecessary and excessive from common fouls.  Unnecessary and excessive is Harden kicking James while on the floor after the play is dead.  (Mind you, that wasn't called a flagrant 2 in game).  It was very aggressive defense and a player who was trying to fend off and create space.  The defender leaned his head into the ballhandler as he was beginning to extend his arm to create space while transferring the ball to his other hand to lay the ball up.  Quite simply, that was a basketball play, and this occurred in a split second while a player was going up for a shot.  If Smart punched him in the face and then shot it, sure, that's flagrant.  This was contact that occurred in the context of the play.  It was not excessive or unnecessary any more than your common offensive foul for charging or clearing out.

Smart raised his elbow to shoulder level and intentionally lurched to the left in an attempt to draw a foul.  His elbow happened to contact the defender's head rather than shoulder or torso.  He was not transferring the ball between hands.  He had both hands on the ball through the contact up until he shot the ball.  It was not a typical layup attempt where the player extends his arm to fend off the defender. 

[rollie mass]

we were taught to bait the defender and as he reached over brought elbow up as an intregal part of shot-rollie massimino called it the bully move,it worked  and the defensive player wouldn't do that again.marcus didn't do that,the refs let him play tough d but this was by definition flagrant and too obvious-

[e4sym0de]

I think it is pretty obvious he did it intentianally. He maybe didn´t want to hit Payton in the face, but the elbow is clearly moving out.

[kozlodoev]

Absolutely horrible. There's no way to prove intent on something like that. I fully expect the NBA to review that and downgrade it. Just ridiculous.

The flagrant foul rule says nothing about intent.  Unnecessary contact is a flagrant-1.  Unnecessary and excessive contact is a flagrant-2.  It was clearly unnecessary contact.   Because the elbow struck the head, I think they'll leave it at a flagrant-2. 

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_b.html

Unnecessary contact can really describe any foul, you realize.  But intent is typically used as a way to separate unnecessary and excessive from common fouls.  Unnecessary and excessive is Harden kicking James while on the floor after the play is dead.  (Mind you, that wasn't called a flagrant 2 in game).  It was very aggressive defense and a player who was trying to fend off and create space.  The defender leaned his head into the ballhandler as he was beginning to extend his arm to create space while transferring the ball to his other hand to lay the ball up.  Quite simply, that was a basketball play, and this occurred in a split second while a player was going up for a shot.  If Smart punched him in the face and then shot it, sure, that's flagrant.  This was contact that occurred in the context of the play.  It was not excessive or unnecessary any more than your common offensive foul for charging or clearing out.

Maybe you think that's how the rule must be interpreted, but it certainly isn't at this point.

Also, the defender didn't "lean in" anywhere. Payton was, in fact, trying to avoid giving up a three-point play, which was the main reason Smart had to go for the awkward, ill-advised elbow swing to the face. This is neither common nor really a basketball play. And the decision on whether it will stay Flagrant 2 will hinge or whether they will find it relevant that little contact was actually made with Payton's head. I wouldn't hold my breath up, targeting players' head is not exactly something the league considers lightly.