Was this foul as bad as it looks?

[sandman]

Missed the game on TV, but noticed this photo on ESPN of Bynam laying some wood on Splitter. Also noticed there was no flagrant called according to the box score, so is this simply a single moment snapshot of a foul that really wasn't that bad?

Bynum Foul (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/photos?gameId=301228024&photoId=1032594)

[TDMVPDPOY]

there was at leasts 2-3 flag fouls not called this game, fkn fakers

[DJ Mbenga]

one of those super pump fakes player almost lands on a player. suprisrd it wasn't called a flagrant. the Parker foul now that's laughable that was no flagrant. he even got a lot of ball.

[easjer]

Looked bad on TV, but it didn't appear to be intention. Still surprised they didn't call a flagrant on it, given that Bynum was around his neck (though that was automatic flagrant).

But on the whole, honestly, I thought the Lakers got the worse end of the calls, and there seemed to be some definite make-ups on both ends. Very odd officiating.

[Frankie23]

For me the only flagrant foul was Artest to TP, not because it was hard, but because he didn't show that he wanted to play the ball..
Bynum's foul was hard, but not on porpuse..it was kind of an accident..

[EricB]

according to McDonald Pop told James Capers the Parker and Splitter foul were gonna be sent to the league....

[itzsoweezee]

The Bynum foul definitely should've been a flagrant. The Artest foul did not look flagrant to me. He definitely went for the ball, unlike Bynum, who has a history of dirty plays.

[DMC]

I didn't think any of the fouls were flagrant. That one from Artest looked bad because of Tony's response, but the replay shows Artest just swiped down at the ball. That's better than letting someone get a free layup or a three point play. I wish our guys would foul that hard sometimes.

[widowmaker]

according to McDonald Pop told James Capers the Parker and Splitter foul were gonna be sent to the league....

I can't wait to see what they say. I hope my theory isn't correct

[BoricuaCJA]

Artest foul was not a flagrant, he was going for the ball and stopping the easy layup. Now the Bynum foul on Splitter imo is. He clothelines Splitter.

[greyforest]

according to McDonald Pop told James Capers the Parker and Splitter foul were gonna be sent to the league....

looks like lakers get to cough up some $$ for attacking these players

[UnWantedTheory]

? Artest did not appear to go for the ball at all. He came from behind and his arm's came down over TP's body. Tony did sell it though. The foul on Splitter from Bynum should have been flagrant IMO. But as previously posted, calls were semi made up & the officiating was kinda weird. Either way it was a W....So I am happy.

[UnWantedTheory]

Artest foul was not a flagrant, he was going for the ball and stopping the easy layup. Now the Bynum foul on Splitter imo is. He clothelines Splitter.
I still dont see how he made a play at the ball on that foul. He was fouling so TP didn't get the easy bucket, but did not go for the ball at all...IMO.

[AFBlue]

I think Splitter probably could've sold it and gotten a flagrant if he wanted, but I actually like that his reaction was to sack up and take it like a man.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

Lakers borderline flagranted us like three or four times and we still dominated them.

[Brodie Bruce]

Missed the game on TV, but noticed this photo on ESPN of Bynam laying some wood on Splitter. Also noticed there was no flagrant called according to the box score, so is this simply a single moment snapshot of a foul that really wasn't that bad?

It was just one of those Robert Horry-style hard fouls. Spurfan calling for flagrant or Bynum getting ejected is just drunk on Homerade.

[MI21]

They were all pretty flagrant for today's NBA, particularly regular season.

[sa_butta]

i thought the Artest foul was pretty rough, he pulled on his shoulders...how was that going for the ball??

[Mark in Austin]

Bynum just didn't like Splitter's highlights.

[Fabbs]

i thought the Artest foul was pretty rough, he pulled on his shoulders...how was that going for the ball??
Right.
Artest didn't go for the ball and happen to get shoulder.
He went for the shoulder and happened to get ball.
Punk ass.

[hater]

both flagrant in today's NBA

[sahoopster]

Lakers borderline flagranted us like three or four times and we still dominated them.

Sean mentioned it last night and I agree, that he took it, kept his cool, and just kept playing the way Manu does. Make them pay on the court.

[Agloco]

i thought the Artest foul was pretty rough, he pulled on his shoulders...how was that going for the ball??

Ron-Ron did get the ball with one hand tbh. Looks bad because he happened to get Tony shoulder with his other hand and knocked him down.

[spurspokesman]

The refs can repay us when it counts the most. THE PLAYOFFS:toast

[Fabbs]

Ron-Ron did get the ball with one hand tbh. Looks bad because he happened to get Tony shoulder with his other hand and knocked him down.
No, he happened to get ball as he went for shoulder.

[xmas1997]

As usual the Spurs had to beat the Lakers as well as the refs in order to win the game.
I am used to it now. Those were two of the most obvious flagrant fouls I've seen in a long while, not to mention the tech on Hill that shouldn't have been!

[EVAY]

Spurs are always going to get hard (at least) fouls from the Lakers, because PJ believes that the Spurs don't respond well to physicality. He ( and Coach Karl of the Nuggets) always play us very very physically expecting us to back down.

We used to back down. We don't this year.

I knew they would go after Parker. PJ knows that he has to be stopped for the Lakers to win. We will see lots more flagrants against Parker. Whether or not they get called, I don't know. But they are coming.

Bynum's foul on Splitter was intentionally flagrant, I believe, to send a message of intimidation. I thought he responded well.

[Ginobilly]

Spurs are always going to get hard (at least) fouls from the Lakers, because PJ believes that the Spurs don't respond well to physicality. He ( and Coach Karl of the Nuggets) always play us very very physically expecting us to back down.

We used to back down. We don't this year.

I knew they would go after Parker. PJ knows that he has to be stopped for the Lakers to win. We will see lots more flagrants against Parker. Whether or not they get called, I don't know. But they are coming.

Bynum's foul on Splitter was intentionally flagrant, I believe, to send a message of intimidation. I thought he responded well.

Those fouls got me so pissed off! Where is Tony Massenberg, Robert Horry, and Kevin Willis when you need them??? Lakers try that shit again and I want to see Laker bodies falling down hard!

[Ginobilly]

Bynum's foul on Splitter was intentionally flagrant, I believe, to send a message of intimidation. I thought he responded well.


Master Splitter will karete chop that knee in half next time they meet.

[xmas1997]

Kevin Willis was the best enforcer I think we ever had.

[toki9]

? Artest did not appear to go for the ball at all. He came from behind and his arm's came down over TP's body. Tony did sell it though. The foul on Splitter from Bynum should have been flagrant IMO. But as previously posted, calls were semi made up & the officiating was kinda weird. Either way it was a W....So I am happy.

Yes and no...Artest reached from behind with both of his hands over Parker's head...his right hand/arm (I think) caught the ball but it was the other hand/arm that pushed Parker's shoulder and body...

[toki9]

No, he happened to get ball as he went for shoulder.

Well, maybe that was his intention, but the result is that he did get ball...so i don't think you can call that as a flagrant...but i'm no expert on this...

[toki9]

Bynum's foul on Splitter was ridiculous, but I loved how Splitter reacted...and he's been like that all season with hard fouls...I don't think there's another team in the NBA that has so many guys who maintain their composure after a hard foul...Manu, Hill, Parker, Splitter, Blair...just about everyone...strangely, I'd pick McDyess as the one most likely to go off on a hard foul...

[GSH]

Artest was just trying to wrap him up and make him earn it from the line. Maybe it was a poor decision, since Tony was out in front like that. But if you look at the play, it's very clear that Artest wasn't trying to hurt him. If he was, it would have looked a lot worse. It still could have been called a Flagrant I, I suppose. But it was just a guy trying to send someone to the line and make sure there was no and-1.

One of the worst shots of the night got no attention at all. I think it was the end of the third quarter. Hill had the ball, and held it a little too long. He finally kicked it out to Neal at the 3P line. The buzzer sounded before Neal could get the shot off, but Neal jacked it up anyway. After he let go of the ball, one of the Lakers (Brown maybe?), just put a wicked head shot on Neal. You can't call a personal foul there, because the buzzer sounded. But they sure as hell could, and should have called a flagrant. You can't take a free shot at someone's head, even in a dead ball situation. Out of all the plays people griped about last night, that one was the most chickenshit.

[ploto]

Artest got the ball and stripped Tony in the process so they were not going to call it a flagrant foul. Guys come down on the ball to strip it all the time. Good, hard foul.

The Bynum foul could have been called flagrant because technically what happened, but since it did appear intentional and was mostly brought about by bad timing, they did not call it. If Bynum had pulled him down at all, then they would have called it for sure. I know it does not have to be intentional to be flagrant but refs look at intent all the time.